Technical Team/Minutes/2010-11-30 - Revision history

MartinMichlmayr: Convert to MediaWiki syntax

2013-03-06T12:56:51Z

Convert to MediaWiki syntax

Goneall at 05:37, 2 December 2010

2010-12-02T05:37:24Z

Goneall at 05:36, 2 December 2010

2010-12-02T05:36:23Z

New page

SPDX RDF/Technical meeting Minutes 11/30/2010:Attendees: Bill SchinellerGary O'NeallPeter WilliamsKate StewartzLib example discussion:Discussion on the whether the SPDX Doc is necessary.  Led to a discussion on having the SPDX Doc contain multiple packages which led to a discussion whether we were constraining the model to a flat model.  Decided to table the discussion for version 2.Discussion on the file being associated to a package - Section 5.5 - need to have a property to associate the file with the package.  Needed to have the RDF parse properly and to have the graph represent the file relationships properlyDiscussion on non-standard licenses - should it be within the package or at the SPDX Doc level.Three possibilities - "describes license" creates a separate license resource not associated with the SPDX doc or package; a property of the SPDX doc; property of the packageDiscussed the pro's and cons of different approaches.  Technically, all three approaches are similar in that the non-standard license will only be valid within the specific SPDX doc (and there is only one package per SPDX doc).  Several people felt that the non-standard license should be associated with the analysis - perhaps leading to it being associated with the SPDX doc.Actions:Gary to writeup a proposal for hasFile belonging to a package (section 5.5)Peter to write up the alternatives for the non-standard licensesKate to write up a proposal for field to be added for the validation of entire package

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:56, 6 March 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	~~<p class~~=~~"MsoNormal" style~~="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-pagination: none; mso-layout-grid-align: none;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;" lang="EN"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">SPDX RDF/Technical meeting Minutes 11/30/2010:</span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-pagination: none; mso-layout-grid-align: none;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;" lang="EN"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Attendees~~: </span></span></span></p><p class~~=~~"MsoNormal" style~~="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-pagination: none; mso-layout-grid-align: none;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;" lang="EN"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Bill Schineller</span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-pagination: none; mso-layout-grid-align: none;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;" lang="EN"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Gary O'Neall</span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-pagination: none; mso-layout-grid-align: none;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;" lang="EN"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Peter Williams</span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-pagination: none; mso-layout-grid-align: none;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;" lang="EN"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Kate Stewart~~</span></span></span></p><p class~~=~~"MsoNormal" style~~="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-pagination: none; mso-layout-grid-align: none;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;" lang="EN"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">zLib example discussion~~:</span></span></span></p><p class~~=~~"MsoNormal" style~~="margin: 0in 0in 10pt 0.5in; mso-pagination: none; mso-layout-grid-align: none;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;" lang="EN"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Discussion on the whether the SPDX Doc is necessary.~~<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span>~~Led to a discussion on having the SPDX Doc contain multiple packages which led to a discussion whether we were constraining the model to a flat model.~~<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span>~~Decided to table the discussion for version 2.</span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-pagination: none; mso-layout-grid-align: none;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;" lang="EN"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Discussion on the file being associated to a package - Section 5.5 - need to have a property to associate the file with the package.~~<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span>~~Needed to have the RDF parse properly and to have the graph represent the file relationships properly</span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-pagination: none; mso-layout-grid-align: none;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;" lang="EN"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Discussion on non-standard licenses - should it be within the package or at the SPDX Doc level.</span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt 0.5in; mso-pagination: none; mso-layout-grid-align: none;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;" lang="EN"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Three possibilities - "describes license" creates a separate license resource not associated with the SPDX doc or package; a property of the SPDX doc; property of the package</span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt 0.5in; mso-pagination: none; mso-layout-grid-align: none;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;" lang="EN"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Discussed the pro's and cons of different approaches.~~<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span>~~Technically, all three approaches are similar in that the non-standard license will only be valid within the specific SPDX doc (and there is only one package per SPDX doc).~~<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">  </span>~~Several people felt that the non-standard license should be associated with the analysis - perhaps leading to it being associated with the SPDX doc.~~</span></span></span></p><p class~~=~~"MsoNormal" style~~="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-pagination: none; mso-layout-grid-align: none;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;" lang="EN"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Actions~~:</span></span></span></p><p class~~=~~"MsoNormal" style~~="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-pagination: none; mso-layout-grid-align: none;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;" lang="EN"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Gary to writeup a proposal for hasFile belonging to a package (section 5.5)</span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-pagination: none; mso-layout-grid-align: none;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;" lang="EN"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Peter to write up the alternatives for the non-standard licenses</span></span></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-pagination: none; mso-layout-grid-align: none;"><span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-ansi-language: EN;" lang="EN"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Kate to write up a proposal for field to be added for the validation of entire package~~</span></span></span></p>~~	+	== Attendees ==
		+
		+	* Bill Schineller
		+	* Gary O'Neall
		+	* Peter Williams
		+	* Kate Stewart
		+
		+	== zLib example discussion ==
		+
		+	Discussion on the whether the SPDX Doc is necessary. Led to a discussion on having the SPDX Doc contain multiple packages which led to a discussion whether we were constraining the model to a flat model. Decided to table the discussion for version 2.
		+
		+	Discussion on the file being associated to a package - Section 5.5 - need to have a property to associate the file with the package. Needed to have the RDF parse properly and to have the graph represent the file relationships properly
		+
		+	Discussion on non-standard licenses - should it be within the package or at the SPDX Doc level.
		+
		+	Three possibilities - "describes license" creates a separate license resource not associated with the SPDX doc or package; a property of the SPDX doc; property of the package
		+
		+	Discussed the pro's and cons of different approaches. Technically, all three approaches are similar in that the non-standard license will only be valid within the specific SPDX doc (and there is only one package per SPDX doc). Several people felt that the non-standard license should be associated with the analysis - perhaps leading to it being associated with the SPDX doc.
		+
		+	==Actions==
		+
		+	* Gary to writeup a proposal for hasFile belonging to a package (section 5.5)
		+	* Peter to write up the alternatives for the non-standard licenses
		+	* Kate to write up a proposal for field to be added for the validation of entire package
		+
		+	[[Category:Technical\|Minutes]]
		+	[[Category:Minutes]]

← Older revision	Revision as of 05:37, 2 December 2010
(No difference)