-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 84
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add upstream
field.
#312
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Add upstream
field.
#312
Conversation
Fixes #249. Signed-off-by: Oliver Chang <ochang@google.com>
LGTM |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looking good! Thanks for moving this forward. 🙇
Had a few thoughts on capturing the intent from our discussion in #249, but I defer to the OSV maintainers here.
docs/schema.md
Outdated
@@ -518,7 +519,26 @@ package(s). For example, if a CVE describes a vulnerability in a language | |||
library, and a Linux distribution package contains that library and therefore | |||
publishes an advisory, the distribution's OSV record must not list the CVE ID as | |||
an alias. Similarly, distributions often bundle multiple upstream | |||
vulnerabilities into a single record. `related` should be used in these cases. | |||
vulnerabilities into a single record. `upstream` should be used in these cases. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nit: I think it's slightly unclear what "these cases" refers to here, since this paragraph touches on both upstream and downstream packages.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the pointing this out. I've tweaked the wording here to make it clearer.
Co-authored-by: Dan Luhring <luhring@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: Oliver Chang <oliverchang@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Dan Luhring <luhring@users.noreply.github.com> Signed-off-by: Oliver Chang <oliverchang@users.noreply.github.com>
Signed-off-by: Oliver Chang <oliverchang@users.noreply.github.com>
Thanks for the suggestions @luhring ! |
Fixes #249.