[Openvas-devel] Call for Votes CR #48: Define OMP/OAP in RelaxNG Schema Language

Matthew Mundell matthew.mundell at greenbone.net
Fri May 14 17:40:28 CEST 2010


> Am 11.05.2010 00:24, schrieb Jan-Oliver Wagner:
>
> > I am not happy with the bashing language against the current state
> > of OMP/OAP. It is work in progress and thus by definition not complete
> > nor bug-free. Justifying RelaxNG with this work-in-progress-state seems
> > wrong to me. I'd prefer to not leave the text as is.
>
> I did not intent bashing OMP/OAP. I'll change the text accordingly. Can
> you please point be to the places you want to be changed?

Some guesses.  Under Purpose

	...redundancies, contradictions and other inconsistencies...

focusses on the negative aspects.  It could say something like "help to
make the protocols consistent".

And the first paragraph of Rational

	Currently, OMP is not really documented and OAP is not documented at all:
	Change Request #23 is not maintained when the OMP implementation is
	changed. So the only reference for OMP is the source of openvas-manager and
	the only reference for OAP is the openvas-administrator. Due to the nature
	of the XML parser used (like most XML parsers), it's very hard to find out
	the correct syntax of OMP resp. OAP not talking about the semantics.

focusses entirely negatively on the current state of development.

It sounds like Jan is concerned that the CR says: OMP/OAP is badly
documented and specified, so we should introduce RelaxNG.


More information about the Openvas-devel mailing list