Technical Team/Minutes/2011-08-02

<p style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; margin-top: 5px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 0px; font-size: 12px; color: #666666; line-height: 18px; font-weight: normal; padding: 0px;">Minutes 7/28/2011

Attendees:

• Kirsten Newcomer
• Nicholas Loke
• Peter Williams
• Kate Stewart
• Steve Cropper
• Jack Manbeck
• Marshall Clow

Agenda:

• Discussion of Supplier related fields
• Review of recent updates to the Spec
• Open Action Items (see list at end of minutes)

Supplier fields discussion

• Kate has updated the working version of the spec with the two fields discussed last week
  • Package Supplier
  • Package Originator
• Today's discussion started with some email threads on intended use of 
• We seem to have a common understanding of what info should be used to fill in the Package Supplier field
• We're still working toward a common understanding for the Package Originator field
  • We discussed a few possibilities. For example, is the data in the Package Originator field
    • the copyright holder?
    • the place where the Supplier got the code?
  • We discussed the desire to capture the chain of custody in the SPDX document; Kate noted that was part of the original intent of the Reviewer field
  • We noted that there is an overlap between the goal of capturing chain of custody and the need for hierarchy in the SPDX document; hierarchy will be discussed post 1.0
• Concluded: we need to make an extra effort to document the thinking behind these fields and provide usage guidelines

Additional updates to Spec

</p>

• Kate walked the team through some additional updates that have been made to the spec as well as some planned changes based on feedback
• Key changes include:
  
  • Clean up of RDF section (typos, spelling)
  • Proposed changes to certain field names for tag/value
  • Section 1.7: Conformance statement will point to trademark statement that is being worked by legal team and will be posted to web. This is not yet finalized.
  • Section 2.2: SPDX data will still be delivered under PDDL-1.0. Confidentiality field has been dropped.
    • Acknowledged that this could be an issue for using SPDX with commercial/proprietary code and plan to discuss commercial code use case post-1.0 GA
  • Recommend that info be added on where to provide feedback

<p style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; margin-top: 5px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 0px; font-size: 12px; color: #666666; line-height: 18px; font-weight: normal; padding: 0px;">Open Action Items

</p>

• Everyone: Bug list review
  • review for any open P1s assigned to you
  • review closed bugs to be sure we're in agreement
• Start developing Guidelines for Implementation/Use and/or Best Practices 
  • Everyone: Review current FAQ as starting point. You can find it here: 
    http://spdx.org/spec/guidelines
  • If you've volunteered to update/add to a certain section, please add your name here. :-)
• Kirsten: Provide website location for 2 items so can be referenced in Spec
  • Process for requesting licenses be added to SPDX license list. 
  • SPDX trademark terms.
    • I've added placehoder text for a links here: http://spdx.org/spec&nbsp;
    • I don't have the privs to create a new child page and will send a note to Martin 
• Everyone: Please review the spec with the goal of approving final version next week if possible

<p style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; margin-top: 5px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 10px; margin-left: 0px; font-size: 12px; color: #666666; line-height: 18px; font-weight: normal; padding: 0px;">Corrections, additions welcome.

</p>