Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 20:04:00 +0100 From: Ceri Davies <ceri@submonkey.net> To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org>, Oliver Eikemeier <eikemeier@fillmore-labs.com>, Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org>, freebsd-vuxml@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/security/portaudit-db/database portaudit.txt portaudit.xlist portaudit.xml Message-ID: <20040817190400.GM5433@submonkey.net> In-Reply-To: <20040817175847.GC43426@madman.celabo.org> References: <20040817122453.05edaaea@localhost> <56FC3488-F075-11D8-924A-00039312D914@fillmore-labs.com> <20040817175847.GC43426@madman.celabo.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--2fjX3cMESU3XgGmZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 12:58:47PM -0500, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote: > [Moving to freebsd-vuxml ... oh how I wish Bcc worked so that people on > the other list knew where this went :-) ] >=20 > On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 07:46:16PM +0200, Oliver Eikemeier wrote: > > When you can live with the dummy text produced by my perl script > > ("Please contact the FreeBSD Security Team for more information.") and > > we can make the `discovered' entry optional, fine with me. I can write > > a `make entry' perl script that parses a form an generates a template > > entry, send-pr like. >=20 > FWIW, this sounds fine by me, except about the <discovered> part. > I see your point about it though... it may be dangerous to have a > bogus value (like the date of entry), because it may not get corrected > later. But I don't want it optional, so that it is not forgotten. > Perhaps we need the possiblity of marking something explicitly > <unspecified> for such occassions ... >=20 > In the mean time, could the date of entry be used? And perhaps a > comment could be a workaround for now, something like >=20 > <discovered>2004-08-17</discovered> <!-- XXX please correct ---> Disclaimer: I've come from the other list and am not familiar with the issues here, but this sounds like something that attributes were intended to cover. Something like: <discovered state=3D"unconfirmed>2004-08-17</discovered> vs. <discovered state=3D"confirmed>2004-08-17</discovered> Adjust values of state depending on what the two options really are. This has the benefit of being backwards compatible, assuming that the consumers are XML parsers. Ceri --=20 It is not tinfoil, it is my new skin. I am a robot. --2fjX3cMESU3XgGmZ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (FreeBSD) iD4DBQFBIlagocfcwTS3JF8RAmycAJ9Lk9NgOYKS+KunVPKA43xHT8pILACYjFVq J1WSw4TmPUIY0HpiCyTI8Q== =NQPl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --2fjX3cMESU3XgGmZ--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040817190400.GM5433>