2008/5/6 Jan-Oliver Wagner [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Opinions?
Even though client and server releases are different I don't suggest
bundling the PO files with the openvasd release and have the server
handle gettext translations. For several reasons:
- the NASL code is actually in the openvas-plugins
On Tuesday 06 May 2008 16:18, Javier Fernandez-Sanguino wrote:
2008/5/6 Jan-Oliver Wagner [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Opinions?
Even though client and server releases are different I don't suggest
bundling the PO files with the openvasd release and have the server
handle gettext translations. For
On Tuesday 06 May 2008 18:05, Thomas Reinke wrote:
So, I'd be interested in your opinion/thoughts on whether we should
remove any of the Server-side localization support for NASL scripts
?
While I've been a fan of localization support (given our environment,
we often deal with more
Hi,
I once again stumbled across problems caused by the mutlilingual
features of OpenVAS server (as inherited by Nessus).
I wonder whether it makes sense at all to have the NASL scripts allow
for other languages than english. IMHO this adds only unnecessary source codes,
user confusion,
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008, Jan-Oliver Wagner wrote:
AFAIU, the security language is english. All relevant sources of security
alerts are in english and need to be understood anyway by the auditors.
(Yes, there are some non-english sources of security alerts, but in fact
these could even be better
2008/4/30 Jan-Oliver Wagner [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi,
I once again stumbled across problems caused by the mutlilingual
features of OpenVAS server (as inherited by Nessus).
I wonder whether it makes sense at all to have the NASL scripts allow
for other languages than english. IMHO this adds
