After (much!) more discussion, we renamed this property to invocation.toolExecutedSuccessfully . This is the last rename of that property, I promise! Larry From:
sarif@lists.oasis-open.org <
sarif@lists.oasis-open.org> On Behalf Of Larry Golding (Comcast) Sent: Monday, March 19, 2018 9:40 AM To: 'Michael Fanning' <
Michael.Fanning@microsoft.com>;
sarif@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [sarif] Change to invocation.processSuccessful I made this change directly in the Provisional Draft . Larry From:
sarif@lists.oasis-open.org <
sarif@lists.oasis-open.org > On Behalf Of Larry Golding (Comcast) Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2018 3:14 PM To: 'Michael Fanning' <
Michael.Fanning@microsoft.com >;
sarif@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [sarif] Change to invocation.processSuccessful I’d accept that. Larry From: Michael Fanning <
Michael.Fanning@microsoft.com > Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2018 3:12 PM To: Larry Golding (Comcast) <
larrygolding@comcast.net >;
sarif@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: RE: [sarif] Change to invocation.processSuccessful Can we consider a more descriptive name? ‘processExitedSuccessfully’ for example? From:
sarif@lists.oasis-open.org <
sarif@lists.oasis-open.org > On Behalf Of Larry Golding (Comcast) Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2018 12:06 PM To:
sarif@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [sarif] Change to invocation.processSuccessful In merging the change for #115 (process outcome), I made a substantive change to the description of the default value for the invocation.processSuccessful property: Was: If this property is absent, its value SHALL be taken to be true if the exitCode property (§3.13.8) is present and has the value 0; otherwise its value SHALL be taken to be false . Now is: If this property is absent, its value SHALL be taken to be false if the exitCode property (§3.13.8) is present and has a non-zero value; otherwise its value SHALL be taken to be true . Please reply if you disagree. Larry