Security bugs should not be classified as 'sru'

[Daniel Holbach]

Feedback from Bryce:

On http://reports.qa.ubuntu.com/reports/sponsoring/, security bugs are tagged as SRUs. However, I cannot upload to ubuntu-security and actually I'm not sure the SRU process is relevant for security bugs.

Should security bugs should be listed as type 'sru' in the sponsoring report? I'm wondering maybe not?

Possibly security bugs should be excluded entirely from the report? Possibly I haven't had enough experience with them, but I'm not sure I have the right access to process them?

[Daniel Holbach (dholbach)]

I agree about not classifying them as 'sru', but AFAIK the security team uses this overview for their sponsoring as well and I'm not sure if they should have to have their own sponsorship overview. I don't know - maybe we could have a separate table? Any thoughts on this?

[Benjamin Drung (bdrung)]

I think we should change the type of these bugs from "SRU" to "security".