Hello, thanks Sébastien for the suggestions. Please find my comments inline.
Le 25 octobre 2011 15:04, Sébastien AUCOUTURIER <[email protected]> a écrit : > Hi, > thanks jan, > perhaps you can also talk about how description should be write or order ? > from what i see most of the plugins start by ' Overview : ... > Vulnerability Insight: ...' > > but some not start with a Reference, then Overview, then Vulnerability > Insight: as secpod_ms08-045_900030.nasl > some have not Overview as win_CVE-2008-087.nasl > For this point, and despite I admit that normalization would be welcome, I think that we should let it as is for existing scripts. Eventually a new change request could propose a standard construct for new scripts? The main problem I think, is that a given format could make sense for a script and not for another one (e.g. vulnerability detection vs. service or OS detection NVTs). > and also where to put CR/LF ? > Are there cases where strangely wrapped text is problematical? I think that for all of our tools the GUI is responsible for wrapping descriptions. Here as well though, if a CR comes with propositions for standardizing script descriptions, that's something that could be added to it. If there are no concerns, and as the points exposed in the CR have already been discussed before, I would like to call for a vote on the CR. My vote is +1. Regards. -- Henri Doreau | Greenbone Networks GmbH | http://www.greenbone.net Neuer Graben 17, 49074 Osnabrueck, Germany | AG Osnabrueck, HR B 202460 Executive Directors: Lukas Grunwald, Dr. Jan-Oliver Wagner _______________________________________________ Openvas-plugins mailing list [email protected] http://lists.wald.intevation.org/mailman/listinfo/openvas-plugins
