We need a way to handle PR with security fixes

[kaistian]

Cups has 2 security issues that have been fixed, and I have created a PR for it #57098
It's been 10 days know and no one have helped me fix the test error or merges the changes.

I'm very concern about how Void actually handles security fixes.
At least it should be possible to tag/label a PR a security fix so maybe it get some attention.

As it is now the users is at risk.

[tranzystorekk]

We are ultimately volunteer driven, and no urgency label is going to magically provide you with any guarantees.

[classabbyamp]

If a PR is urgent and not getting attention, you can join the irc channel (#xbps on libera.chat) and request someone takes a look

[kaistian]

We are ultimately volunteer driven, and no urgency label is going to magically provide you with any guarantees.

I know, nobody can guarantee anything, but it would make them more visible and might help determine what PR someone prioritized, I would say that's a win.

If a PR is urgent and not getting attention, you can join the irc channel (#xbps on libera.chat) and request someone takes a look

The problem with IRC is that it's hard to for some with binocular problems and for people that doesn't have English as first language and need to spell check, reread and fix a sentence 4-5 times before it is understandable.

[classabbyamp]

web.libera.chat works in a browser (so it can have the various assistive technologies of websites) and has spell check

[ahesford]

The Void workflow is what it is, and people can participate or not as they see fit.

I fail to see how IRC, which is inherently textual, is any more difficult to use than GitHub, which is also textual, but with loads of additional visual cruft that would seem to pose extra problems for those with sight issues. We have regularly engaged with users who rely on screen readers and other assistive technologies on IRC.

Being a foreign speaker is not a problem, as many conversations on IRC proceed with high latency.