RE: [sarif] Change to invocation.processSuccessful

After (much!) more discussion, we renamed this property to invocation.toolExecutedSuccessfully. This is the last rename of that property, I promise!

 

Larry

 

From:  <> On Behalf Of Larry Golding (Comcast)
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2018 9:40 AM
To: 'Michael Fanning' <>; 
Subject: RE: [sarif] Change to invocation.processSuccessful

 

I made this change directly in the Provisional Draft.

 

Larry

 

From:  <> On Behalf Of Larry Golding (Comcast)
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2018 3:14 PM
To: 'Michael Fanning' <>; 
Subject: RE: [sarif] Change to invocation.processSuccessful

 

I’d accept that.

 

Larry

 

From: Michael Fanning <> 
Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2018 3:12 PM
To: Larry Golding (Comcast) <>; 
Subject: RE: [sarif] Change to invocation.processSuccessful

 

Can we consider a more descriptive name?

 

‘processExitedSuccessfully’ for example?

 

 

From:  <> On Behalf Of Larry Golding (Comcast)
Sent: Saturday, March 17, 2018 12:06 PM
To: 
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