Hello Michael, I wanted to use a "CVE_STATUS_REASON", but it was advised here https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/181037 by Richard. So I was thinking, that it has to correct.
Regards, Andrej On Fri, 2023-05-19 at 15:09 +0200, Michael Opdenacker wrote: > Hi Andrej, > > On 19.05.23 at 10:18, Andrej Valek via lists.openembedded.org wrote: > > - Replace CVE_CHECK_IGNORE with CVE_STATUS + [CVE_STATUS_REASONING] to be > > more flexible. CVE_STATUS should contain flag for each CVE with accepted > > values "Ignored", "Not applicable" or "Patched". It allows to add > > a status for each CVEs. > > - Optional CVE_STATUS_REASONING flag variable may contain a reason > > why the CVE status was used. It will be added in csv/json report like > > a new "reason" entry. > > > I'm not a native English speaker, but what about just > "CVE_STATUS_REASON" instead of "CVE_STATUS_REASONING"? > > "Reasoning" is a mental process if I understand correctly. See > https://www.englishforums.com/English/ReasonVsReasoning/zdgdw/post.htm. > It seems to me that the term "reason" should be sufficient, as the > "reason" flag that you're using. > > I'd be interested in what others think about this... > Thanks in advance > Cheers > > Michael. >
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#181551): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/181551 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/99008417/21656 Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
