On 8/26/2011 11:41 AM, Eric Covener wrote: > Should we bump the "5"'s in the draft advisory and/or code to a more > liberal #? At the very least for the 2.0 rewrite solution that will > return forbidden instead of full content?
Can we please avoid sending more advisories without a canonical link to a wiki recommendations/discussion/observations page? As admins have already adopted the 5's, they are in the best position to tell us what broke, based on feedback from their audience. I'll start one shortly.
