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

Update apt_repo.rst #2873

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 19, 2018
Merged

Conversation

vaibssingh
Copy link
Contributor

@vaibssingh vaibssingh commented Jan 15, 2018

Replaced https://github.com/freedomofpress/ossec with https://github.com/ossec/ossec-hids

Status

Ready for review

Description of Changes

Fixes #2872

Checklist

  • Doc linting passed locally

@codecov-io
Copy link

Codecov Report

Merging #2873 into develop will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #2873   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    85.55%   85.55%           
========================================
  Files           31       31           
  Lines         1917     1917           
  Branches       214      214           
========================================
  Hits          1640     1640           
  Misses         228      228           
  Partials        49       49

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update f0a8090...c51542d. Read the comment docs.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jan 15, 2018

@conorsch @msheiny before merging this could you please confirm that I did not miss anything ? If that's the right fix, maybe it would be good to archive https://github.com/freedomofpress/ossec to avoid confusion.

@conorsch
Copy link
Contributor

Ah, I see. For background: we used to build the OSSEC packages for Ubuntu over in the https://github.com/freedomofpress/ossec repository. Those files were then manually copied into the build/ directory of this repository, for use in staging, and also formal releases.

That workflow was understandably pretty confusing to new contributors, so in #1468 we decided to fold the OSSEC build logic into the SecureDrop repository. That's been the way we do things for nearly a year now, but as @vaibssingh points out, we never updated the corresponding documentation.

maybe it would be good to archive https://github.com/freedomofpress/ossec to avoid confusion.

👍 Good idea, @dachary, I'm in favor of that solution, as well. We're releasing 0.5.1 today, so I'll approve this PR and let it hang another day to give folks a chance to chime in. By tomorrow, if no dissenting opinion has been voiced, let's merge and I'll handle archiving the extra repo.

Copy link
Contributor

@redshiftzero redshiftzero left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @vaibssingh, merging!

(Also I made an internal ticket to get the old OSSEC repo archived, that should happen soon to prevent further confusion.)

@redshiftzero redshiftzero merged commit 958b6bf into freedomofpress:develop Jan 19, 2018
conorsch pushed a commit to freedomofpress/ossec that referenced this pull request Jan 19, 2018
Adds a header to the top of the README so that any visitors will be
redirected to the SecureDrop repository immediately. This is a result of
the discussion in the SecureDrop repository, when a contributor pointed out
the potential confusion [0].

[0] freedomofpress/securedrop#2873
@conorsch
Copy link
Contributor

Archived the old repository, and posted a link to the SecureDrop repo at the top of the README: https://github.com/freedomofpress/ossec

@vaibssingh vaibssingh deleted the patch-1 branch January 23, 2018 06:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants