We strive to respect the community that has given us so much, so in the odd situation where we get multiple submissions for the same vulnerability, generally we will work with the first person who assigns themselves to the issue or the first person that submits a good-faith PR. A good-faith PR might not even work, but it will show that the author is working their way toward a solution. Despite this general rule, there are rare circumstances where we may ask a contributor to step aside or allow a committer to take the lead on the creation of a new module if a complete and working module with documents has not already been submitted. This kind of expedited module creation process comes up infrequently, and usually it involves high-profile or high priority modules that we have marked internally as time-critical: think KEV list, active exploitation campaigns, CISA announcements, etc. In those cases, we may ask a contributor that is assigned to the issue or who has submitted an incomplete module to allow a committer to take over an issue or a module PR in the interest of getting a module out quickly. If a contributor has submitted an incomplete module, they will remain as a co-author of the module and we may build directly onto the PR they submitted, leaving the original commits in the tree. We sincerely hope that the original author will remain involved in this expedited module creation process. We would appreciate testing, critiquing, and any assistance that can be offered. If the module is complete but requires minor changes, we may ask the contributor to allow us to take over testing/verification and make these minor changes without asking so we can land the module as quickly as possible. In these cases of minor code changes, the authorship of the module will remain unchanged. We hope everyone involved in this expedited module creation process continues to feel valued and appreciated.
0 commit comments