Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 07:25:17 -0700 From: Murray Stokely <murray@freebsdmall.com> To: Marc Fonvieille <blackend@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Remko Lodder <remko@FreeBSD.org>, doc-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-doc@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: www/en/marketing os-comparison.sgml Message-ID: <20050722142517.GA21388@freebsdmall.com> In-Reply-To: <20050722123418.GE594@gothic.blackend.org> References: <200507191910.j6JJAg6a077939@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050722123418.GE594@gothic.blackend.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jul 22, 2005 at 02:34:18PM +0200, Marc Fonvieille wrote: > > Modified files: > > en/marketing os-comparison.sgml > > Log: > > Update the OS Comparison article. > > > > PR: www/82761 http://www.FreeBSD.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=82761 > > This update disturbs me. By mentioning CERT advisories without an OS > separation gives me the feeling that the document is missing its > objective. Why not just give a link to CERT advisories list then? > The previous "CERT Advisories in 2000 that affected Linux" and "CERT > Advisories in 2000 that affected Windows" parts were an interesting > advocacy argument. I don't think phpBB or Oracle vulns well push people > to use FreeBSD, etc. Yes, I agree that a full list of CERT advisories of the last year is less useful than the several years old breakdown of CERT advisories grouped by affected operating system. Also, surely such information is provided via XML somewhere and so if it was desired it should be automatically syndicated, not copied in to this document manually. - Murray
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050722142517.GA21388>