[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [cti] Motion to Create OASIS Open Repository for CybOX 3.0 Schemas and Examples
I agree with Trey and Bret 100% in the context of TC Work Product repos [1]. The maintainer of these repos is equivalent to the document editor role for prose specifications. The CybOX 3.0 Schemas/Examples repo is an Open Repository [2], which is used for non-work-products. In STIX, I believe we agreed that the JSON schemas were non-normative, hence the decision to use an open repo. Assuming the same logic applies to CybOX (the JSON schemas are non-normative), this should be an open repo rather than a work product repo. My reason for volunteering as a maintainer is based on my experience running the (STIX|CybOX|TAXII)Project organizations on GitHub, and a desire to take work off of the editors' plates. I certainly don't plan to attempt to influence the specifications themselves by accepting things into the open repositories. That said, if it concerns anyone, I'll withdraw my "amended" motion. Greg [1] https://www.oasis-open.org/resources/tcadmin/github-repositories-for-oasis-tc-members-chartered-work [2] https://www.oasis-open.org/resources/open-repositories > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick Maroney [mailto:Pmaroney@Specere.org] > Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2016 11:06 AM > To: Jordan, Bret <bret.jordan@bluecoat.com>; Trey Darley > <trey@kingfisherops.com> > Cc: cti@lists.oasis-open.org; Kirillov, Ivan A. <ikirillov@mitre.org>; Back, Greg > <gback@mitre.org> > Subject: Re: [cti] Motion to Create OASIS Open Repository for CybOX 3.0 > Schemas and Examples > > Point of clarification in terms of Trey's comment regarding Specification > Editors being Github Maintainers: > > To what extent, if any, will these open repositories be used to host draft > specifications, WIP Specifications (Work in Progress), references to same, > issue tracking, etc. ? Presumably they will only be used for managing the > non-normative schemas, examples, and issue tracking related to same. Is > this correct? > > > Patrick Maroney > President > Integrated Networking Technologies, Inc. > Desk: (856)983-0001 > Cell: (609)841-5104 > Email: pmaroney@specere.org <mailto:pmaroney@specere.org> > > > > > On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 11:53 AM -0400, "Jordan, Bret" > <bret.jordan@bluecoat.com <mailto:bret.jordan@bluecoat.com> > wrote: > > > Yes, I agree with Trey. Document Editors should be the GitHub maintainers. > > > > Thanks, > > Bret > > > > Bret Jordan CISSP > Director of Security Architecture and Standards | Office of the CTO Blue Coat > Systems PGP Fingerprint: 63B4 FC53 680A 6B7D 1447 F2C0 74F8 ACAE 7415 > 0050 "Without cryptography vihv vivc ce xhrnrw, however, the only thing that > can not be unscrambled is an egg." > > > On Sep 1, 2016, at 09:26, Trey Darley <trey@kingfisherops.com > <mailto:trey@kingfisherops.com> > wrote: > > On 01.09.2016 14:32:29, Back, Greg wrote: > > > > I move to amend the below proposal as follows: > > Initial Maintainers: Ivan Kirillov, Greg Back > > > > > The document editors should be Github maintainers for their > respective > specifications. > > -- > Cheers, > Trey > ++--------------------------------------------------------------------------++ > Kingfisher Operations, sprl > gpg fingerprint: 85F3 5F54 4A2A B4CD 33C4 5B9B B30D DD6E 62C8 > 6C1D > ++--------------------------------------------------------------------------++ > -- > "It is always possible to add another level of indirection." --RFC 1925 > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]