Christopher Blizzard wrote:
Yes, please. In fact, I would just say shorten that to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] instead of the overly-obscure
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and just use [EMAIL PROTECTED]
security means different things to different people. I was thinking
that making the address of the list
Yes, please. In fact, I would just say shorten that to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] instead of the overly-obscure
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and just use [EMAIL PROTECTED]
security means different things to different people.
I'm surprised no-one has yet mentioned
http://www.wiretrip.net/rfp/policy.html .
This draft includes a link to a Known Vulnerabilities page. Is it in a
good location?
No :-) If, as we hope to, we move to a different website model, we would
want to try and avoid changing this URL, just for the sake of
simplicity. This becomes far less likely if you go for:
On Tue, 09 Oct 2001 09:48:07 -0700, Gervase Markham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of the above, I suggest we populate [EMAIL PROTECTED], because it's
IMO the most sensible and appropriate of the five.
Gerv
Except that [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a public mailing list...
(BTW, Will the 'private' mailing
Mitchell Stoltz wrote:
Do you like the names of the mailing lists,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
Should we use shorter names? I wanted to make it very clear what each
one is for.
The discussion group doesn't need to be as clear, the people who need to
know about it will
Dan Veditz wrote:
Mitchell Stoltz wrote:
Do you like the names of the mailing lists,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
Should we use shorter names? I wanted to make it very clear what each
one is for.
The discussion group doesn't need to be as clear, the people who need
to
Brendan Eich wrote:
I must now channel jwz's ghost and object to lack of hyphens and
cybercrud grp in the last. If short wins, why not
[EMAIL PROTECTED]? Otherwise, -group it.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] is the traditional notification address, I think.
Mike
Please keep in mind that we are creating TWO mailing lists, one to
receive security bug reports from outside and one for internal discussion.
It sounds like people are saying they want [EMAIL PROTECTED] to be
the address where people not on the security group can send security bug
reports.
Mitchell Stoltz wrote:
My question is, is this a valid concern? If most of you think we should
use [EMAIL PROTECTED], then I'm fine with that, but I'd like to
hear opinions about this point.
I don't think it's an issue, and if security group proposal is
specific enough to have not
Mitchell Stoltz wrote:
It sounds like people are saying they want [EMAIL PROTECTED] to be
the address where people not on the security group can send security bug
reports. Yes, this is one of the traditional addresses to use for this
purpose, as several people have pointed out. However,
Mitchell Stoltz wrote:
I think security is ambiguous, and doesn't precisely describe the
purpose of the address, which means it may attract more off-topic
posts. People may think it's for discussion of cryptography
engineering or physical building security or the security of Mozilla
Mitchell Stoltz wrote:
What about the other list address, [EMAIL PROTECTED]?
OK with me, but I don't care much.
Seriously, a .announce style mailing list is a good idea.
Sounds fine to me, although I think the authoritative list should be a
webpage. We can do a mailing list too.
No, my
12 matches
Mail list logo
