Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update baseline.yaml - NEW - OSPS-DO-14 #117

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

SecurityCRob
Copy link
Contributor

suggested wording for OSPS-DO-14 for End-Of-Support statement

suggested wording for OSPS-DO-14

Signed-off-by: CRob <69357996+SecurityCRob@users.noreply.github.com>
@SecurityCRob SecurityCRob added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement New feature or request labels Dec 18, 2024
Comment on lines +656 to +662
The project documentation MUST provide a
descriptive statement when releases or
versions are no longer supported and that
will no longer receive security updates.

This should be provided both in human and
machine-readable formats.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  1. Do we mean "should" or "SHOULD" in the second sentence? If it's the "normal English 'should'", maybe we actually mean "MUST" instead? (Personally, I lean toward SHOULD, but I want to make sure I understand your intent)
  2. As a rule, I don't like the idea of multi-sentence criteria and definitely not multi-paragraph (in the <p> sense, not in the English sense). Could it be be re-written as "The project documentation MUST provide human- and machine-readable descriptive statements when releases are no longer supported and will not longer receive security updates"? (As a note, I condensed "releases or versions" to be "releases" because I'm not entirely clear that there's a meaningful distinction between the two). Or, if the intent was for having both human- and machine-readable be a strong suggestion but not a requirement, then we should move the second sentence into the implementation (which it sort of already is)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants