Date:        Mon, 16 Jan 2023 10:01:48 +0000
    From:        "Geoff Clare via austin-group-l at The Open Group" 
<austin-group-l@opengroup.org>
    Message-ID:  <Y8UgjNwcQKXUwYg6@localhost>

  | There seems to be some misunderstanding here. The only line we
  | have drawn is for requests for new features. We will continue to
  | process bug fix requests for inclusion in Issue 8 for a while yet.

Ah, OK, good.   I thought from:

[This is really Andrew Josey from the minutes of the Jan 12 meeting]
austin-group-l@opengroup.org said:
| We are planning to produce draft 3 soon. 
| Once bugs 768, 243 (if accepted), and 1617 (if updated to add -w) have been
| applied, we just need updated frontmatter to complete draft 3.

| Shortly after the meeting the ISO/IEC ballot got underway to approve the
| revision project (a separate activity to approving the draft!) Andrew will
| need to form the IEEE ballot group as the first part  of the IEEE process.

and I recalled earlier mention (which I will never find now) that it was
planned that Draft 3 be the final draft (I always assumed subject to typo
corrections, editing mistakes, things forgotten which were supposed to
happen, etc, if there were any of those, otherwise there'd be no point
calling it a draft - but I also assumed nothing substantial would change
after it was published).

I am happy to learn that is not to be the case.   I was slightly surprised
to see in that quote that the revision project - ie: all that has been 
happening for the past several years, is not yet formally approved.  What
would happen to all of this work, should that fail?   (Not that I would
anticipate that happening, but one never knows).

That means, I guess, that if someone cared enough about changing what the
text says about uudecode and its handling of setuid bits, that a new bug
report might get that changed.   It won't be me, a bug report from me would
just be to have uuencode/uudecode removed altogether, I think their time to
be mandated, or for applications/users to expect to use them, passed quite
a while ago - though naturally implementations are still likely to support
them for some time yet.

kre

  • Security ris... Alan Coopersmith via austin-group-l at The Open Group
    • Re: Sec... Christoph Anton Mitterer via austin-group-l at The Open Group
      • Re:... Alan Coopersmith via austin-group-l at The Open Group
    • Re: Sec... Robert Elz via austin-group-l at The Open Group
      • Re:... Alan Coopersmith via austin-group-l at The Open Group
      • Re:... Robert Elz via austin-group-l at The Open Group
        • ... Geoff Clare via austin-group-l at The Open Group
        • ... Robert Elz via austin-group-l at The Open Group
          • ... Geoff Clare via austin-group-l at The Open Group
          • ... Bruce Korb via austin-group-l at The Open Group
        • ... Alan Coopersmith via austin-group-l at The Open Group
          • ... Bruce Korb via austin-group-l at The Open Group
            • ... Christoph Anton Mitterer via austin-group-l at The Open Group
          • ... Geoff Clare via austin-group-l at The Open Group
      • Re:... Christoph Anton Mitterer via austin-group-l at The Open Group
        • ... Thorsten Glaser via austin-group-l at The Open Group
          • ... Christoph Anton Mitterer via austin-group-l at The Open Group
            • ... Chet Ramey via austin-group-l at The Open Group

Reply via email to