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>