RE: [cti] Motion to Create OASIS Open Repository for CybOX 3.0 Schemas and Examples

["Back, Greg" <gback@mitre.org>]

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
> 
>