[openvas-discuss] Contributions (fwd)

Adam Jones ajones1 at gmail.com
Mon Nov 7 17:45:11 CET 2005

Sorry guys if this breaks threading on the messages, been looking at
this through list archives.

Here is my 2 cents on plugin management.

I agree that the stable/unstable/testing classification will be enough
for plugins. Although some of the categorization features available in
sourceforge are awesome, I think it would turn out to be more overhead
than it is worth.

I also think that auditing should be structured around where a plugin
is applicable. For now I think it would be good to take the current
plugin classifications and get maintainers set up for those groups.
New plugin submissions can automatically be labelled as alpha and
would need approval from that plugin sections maintainer (or one of
their delegates) to raise the status. This would do two things: A) it
will ensure that the plugin repository is kept well classified so that
people can depend on "stable" status, and B) it provides a point of
contact for the specific category of your plugin.

I know this adds extra work to the project. I think that, given the
community response to this effort, the people are there to do it.
Someone earlier said that getting new plugins is essential to the
success of openvas, and I would like to add that providing a measure
of quality assurance to the plugins is just as important.


More information about the Openvas-discuss mailing list