Skip to content
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

fix(osv): move aliases to related field #1047

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 9, 2024

Conversation

luhring
Copy link
Contributor

@luhring luhring commented Jul 9, 2024

See google/osv.dev#2374 for motivation.

cc: @cpanato

See google/osv.dev#2374 for motivation.

Signed-off-by: Dan Luhring <dluhring@chainguard.dev>
@imjasonh imjasonh merged commit 17dc660 into wolfi-dev:main Jul 9, 2024
3 checks passed
Comment on lines +151 to +153
// Note: The OSV data should include our advisory ID itself among the listed
// related vulnerability IDs.
related := append([]string{adv.ID}, adv.Aliases...)

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi,
I just wanted to ask why you include the advisory's own ID in its related (or aliases) field.
It seems a bit odd to make a record link to itself, but it seem like an intentional decision?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

was my understanding in the beginning to add that as is. maybe i got that wrong

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah it sounded like this was feedback from the OSV team — originally we didn't add in the ID itself to this collection. Happy to remove it if it's not needed! 🧹

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants