THE SPDX WIKI IS NO LONGER ACTIVE. ALL CONTENT HAS BEEN MOVED TO https://github.com/spdx

Difference between revisions of "General Meeting/Minutes/2010-08-26"

From SPDX Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(No difference)

Revision as of 11:26, 10 September 2010

Contents

ADMINISTRATIVE

Agenda

  • Attendance - 18
  • Approval of minutes from BoF session – Approved.
  • New Logistics and Expanding Group
  • Outreach and evangelism:
    • Common Messaging/Presentation – Phil O
    • Industry Venues – Phil R
      • LinuxCon Debrief- Phil O
    • Website – Martin M

Logistics

PhilO discussed need for evolving logistics with the group getting larger and including new folks. We're doing away with the "Who just joined?" approach to attendance and will mainly depend on log-ins to Webshare to record attendance. In addition everyone is encouraged to state their name when speaking. There also some discussion (actually it came up towards the end of the meeting) about providing minutes via a link rather than an attached Word doc.

<h2 style="font-size: 1.5em;">

<h2 style="font-size: 1.5em;"><h2 style="font-size: 1.5em;"><h3 style="font-size: 1.17em;">Common Messaging/Presentation</h3></h2>

PhilO is updating the presentation to reflect Kate's LinuxCon presentation content.

</h2>

</h2><h2 style="font-size: 1.5em;">

Industry Venues

</h2>

PhilO reported on LinuxCon. Jim Zemlin's keynote was all about the new Open Compliance Program, and SPDX was prominently featured. SPDX got some good PR out of it and one article said it was the key to the bigger program. Phil Koltun delivered a more detailed session on the OCP and Kate had one on SPDX. Both were well attended. Finally, we had a Birds of a Feature session.

<h2 style="font-size: 1.5em;">

Website

</h2>

 

Kudos to Martin for helping PhilO get the new spdx.org launched in time for LinuxCon. There was some discussion about making it more obvious how one joins both the group and the mailing list; it's better to be redundant in order to be more welcoming. There was also a discussion about getting examples up to date and getting the Wiki going again. We finally got into a discussion about hosting code for tools. Possibilities were: SourceForge, GitHub.

 

<h2 style="font-size: 1.5em;">

Rollout

</h2>

PhilO mentioned the JohnE and KimW have been working on a rollout plan, expanding on both out technical efforts and outreach/evangelism efforts. More at the next meeting.

 

<h2 style="font-size: 1.5em;">

ACTION ITEMS

</h2>

  • PhilO/Martin - Update on participation page where to join (suggestion was to put link in text, not just at top, consider "I want to use the spec, vs. I want to contribute to the spec" in navigation section.
  • Kate- Transfer document (.pdf) back to WIKI.
  • PhilO- Update standard presentation with LinuxCon2010 input
  • Kate- Clean up the sharing analysis to what is accurate.
  • Kate- Publish the current version number of the specification in brackets behind reference
  • Kim/PhilO- Add and element of 'What's in this for me?" to presentation
  • JeffL (w/Bill/Gary- Update zlib based on new specification
  • All- Look for new examples to add to site.
  • PhilK- Explore possibility of LF hosting source for SPDX tools.
  • Gary- Explore other possible hosting options
  • PhilO- Start making minutes available via link.
  • BillS- Start up RDF sub-group. Solicite members.

 

TECHNICAL

Agenda

<h3 style="font-size: 1.17em;">Mock Up</h3>

Spot was not in attendance, but we reviewed the mock-up. There was fair agreement that its close to what we are looking for (if not "Spot" on)

 

<h3 style="font-size: 1.17em;"><h3 style="font-size: 1.17em;">Short Form Licenses</h3>

Our implicit path had tied a fixed license list of licenses to the spec rev, but JohnE put forth an impassioned argument as to why they should be decoupled: Essentially we'll want the license list to change with more frequency than the spec (months vs. years). A new license can't mean a new spec rev. There was agreement on this point, but and then much discussion about how to manage the license list. 

There was fair agreement just as there is a "playground" for working on the spec and a release process to the current rev, there should be a similar arrangement for licenses (though decoupled) and certainly there should be legal review. There was not complete agreement about the intended scope of the list, but there was agreement that there needed so be some nomination process and that anyone wishing to add a license must be willing to take on the associated work. BobG is willing to be a contributor. A topic of future discussion is how we will come down on the initial V1.0 list of licenses. These issues in contemplated in the rollout framework that we'll be putting forth.

 

<h3 style="font-size: 1.17em;">RDF</h3>

We reviewed the intent of using RDF and BillS described what's been done with DOAP as a model. Essentially, we've chosen RDF as a reasonable balance between the needs of people being able to view and create SPDX docs, and machines to be able to consume and produce the format.

There was agreement that there is lots of work to be done in this area: defining the syntax, defining web repository of license info, documenting usage, etc. We decided that we need a sub-team to take this on. BillS will coordinate and PeterW, Gary and Kate will participate, as well as others who are interested.

 

 

</h3>

 

ATTENDANCE

  • Michael Herzog, NexB
  • Bob Gobeille, FOSSology.org, HP
  • Ann Thornton, Freescale
  • Martin Michlmayr, HP
  • Gary O'Neall, Source Auditor
  • Jeff Luszcz, Palamida
  • Richard Fontana, Red Hat
  • Mark Gisi, Wind River
  • Phil Koltun, Linux Foundation
  • John Ellis, Motorola
  • David Wolfe, Freescale
  • Tom Incorvia, Micro Focus
  • Kim Weins, Open Logic
  • Peter Williams, OpenLogic
  • Bill Schineller, Black Duck Software
  • Jack Manbeck, TI
  • Kate Stewart, Canonical
  • Philip Odence, Black Duck Software

 

Retrieved from "https://wiki.spdx.org/index.php?title=General_Meeting/Minutes/2010-08-26&oldid=554"