tschmidtb51
tschmidtb51
This is now tracked in oasis-tcs/csaf#318. The usage is described in [Section 7.1.8 of the CSAF specification](https://github.com/oasis-tcs/csaf/blob/master/csaf_2.0/prose/csaf-v2-editor-draft.md#718-requirement-8-securitytxt).
I like the idea.
@p1c2u Could you please add your review?
@pombredanne What is the current status of https://github.com/package-url/purl-spec/blob/version-range-spec/VERSION-RANGE-SPEC.rst? Ready for use? :thinking:
> @tschmidtb51 I am pretty satisfied with it at this stage. Unless there are objections I will likely merge it this week. @pombredanne In general, I like the approach. I...
@epoberezkin Any news here?
@sei-vsarvepalli I think this is the right move as it differentiates between "iso8601" and "rfc3339". Also the ABNF clearly states in [RFC 3339 Section 5.6](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3339.html#section-5.6): ``` date-time = full-date "T"...
> [...] Correct. > On the ajv regex recommended by @jan-san , all of these below examples parse okay with the ajv library, where the item 4 should not if...
The value `CSAF` has been added to the registry: https://www.iana.org/assignments/security-txt-fields/security-txt-fields.xhtml
@mgoetzegb Thank you for your contribution. Unfortunately, I'm currently failing to understand the issue. Could you please open an issue describing the steps to reproduce as well as current results...