Please keep in mind that we are creating TWO mailing lists, one to
receive security bug reports from outside and one for internal discussion.
It sounds like people are saying they want [EMAIL PROTECTED] to be
the address where people not on the security group can send security bug
reports. Yes, this is one of the traditional addresses to use for this
purpose, as several people have pointed out. However, no one has
directly responded to my question: I think "security" is ambiguous, and
doesn't precisely describe the purpose of the address, which means it
may attract more off-topic posts. People may think it's for discussion
of cryptography engineering or physical building security or the
security of Mozilla servers, none of which is the case. More off-topic,
irrelevant posts to this address means more work for the maintainers.
My question is, is this a valid concern? If most of you think we should
use "[EMAIL PROTECTED]," then I'm fine with that, but I'd like to
hear opinions about this point.
The second mailing list is for discussion among security group members.
Having a very specific name is not so impotant in this case, and short
is good, but if we're going to use [EMAIL PROTECTED] for the bug
reports address, we'll have to pick another for the group discussion
address.
-Mitch
Mike Shaver wrote:
> Brendan Eich wrote:
>
>> I must now channel jwz's ghost and object to lack of hyphens and
>> cybercrud "grp" in the last. If short wins, why not
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]? Otherwise, -group it.
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] is the traditional notification address, I think.
>
> Mike
>
