Difference between revisions of "Technical Team/Minutes/2020-05-19"

From SPDX Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "May 19, 2020 == Attendees == * Jim Hutchison * Rex Jaeschke * GogginsS * John Mudge * Nisha Kumar * Steve Winslow * Kate Stewart * William Bartholomew * Gary O’Neall * Rose...")
 
(No difference)

Latest revision as of 19:38, 19 May 2020

May 19, 2020

Attendees

  • Jim Hutchison
  • Rex Jaeschke
  • GogginsS
  • John Mudge
  • Nisha Kumar
  • Steve Winslow
  • Kate Stewart
  • William Bartholomew
  • Gary O’Neall
  • Rose Judge
  • Takashi Ninjouji
  • Santiago Torres
  • Peter Shin
  • Vicky Brasseur
  • Thomas Steenbergen
  • Rishabh Bhatnagar

SPDX 2.2

  • Question on how to submit new features beyond 2.2
    • Consensus to add issues in Github
  • SPDX 2.2 wrap up - status of .pdf generation, next steps
    • Kate & Gary - follow up, still some issues outstanding.

SPDX 2.2.1

  • update from Rex
    • A new numbering scheme
    • An appendix will be added to translate from the old to new numbering
    • John gave an update on new format
  • Line breaks discussion
    • Thomas recommended line breaks be made post production rather than explicitly
    • Agreed to not add explicit line breaks
  • Discussion on changing Intent to Description
    • Agreed to change to Description
  • Possible issue with the word Example
    • May have to change to a different word such as sample
    • Thomas raised an issue with changing to sample
  • Embedded HTML in the examples may cause issues
    • Suggest removing the HTML except for anchors
    • May also be an issue with 3.0
  • Major issues have been resolved
  • Expect to have a list of remaining issues by the end of the week

GSoC

  • Anisha, Rohit & Gary - had call, researching alternatives
  • Rishab, Steve & Gary - golang, discussion
  • Philip - Kate, Santiago & Philippe - pending
  • Tenjong - license cross ref, already engaging.
  • reasonable activitity on gitter.
  • Bringing back one of student proposals through community bridge, update June 1.

Automation for the Spec

  • Level of Automation for 3.0
    • OWL document —> Schema’s work —> Sample code, etc.
    • Two sources of errors: tools doing translations, copy paste error
    • Can we look at automating the creation from everything from one source of record.
    • Having mark down be the source of record.
  • Automation Proposals:
  • Pick a source of record, everything else is automated from there.
    • Diagram - how can this work with markdown.
    • Possibly not include generated artifacts in repo.
    • Could be added into a github action to generate diagram. Not store in repo itself, since its generated.
    • Everytime PR, get new OWL document
    • William’s diagrams are already generated by plugin
    • Software generate example files, and then they are included in markdown.
  • Concern: How fragile are the tools?
    • Gary - will handcode in Java, specific to SPDX. Subsection & schemas. Tool dependency.
    • Thomas - Companies do this, but we need to make sure.
  • Sections will have to be very much tied to the formatting.
  • Breaking formatting may break build. PR requested via breaking build. More of burden for submitters.
  • Nisha, Kate, William, are a favor in trying this.
  • Gary looking for collaboration on the tools. Nisha & Rose willing to work with Python.
    • Gary ok to do it in Python, if Rose able to help out here. Separate Sync up in 2 or 3 weeks.
    • William ok mentor. Thomas ok to review.
  • Revisit in 3 weeks - status of tooling

SPDX 3.0

  • How do we submit proposals for 3.0?
    • Use Github Issues
    • Proposal to add Github labels for the profiles
    • Add Tech Team review as a label to schedule a call
  • Annotations and/or Relationships have YAML samples for review
    • Kate will help with the examples
  • Suggest we start a mapping spreadsheet
    • Kate will start the sheet
  • Wait for 2.2.1 template completion from John
    • After template, William will create 3.0
  • Need a way to specify which profiles are in effect
    • Suggest adding a field to the base
    • Base is always listed, additional profiles are also listed
    • Defer versioning
  • Discussed if you can use fields from other profiles
    • OK to re-use fields from other profiles
    • Profiles define which fields are mandatory
    • To be further discussed

Next Week’s Agenda

  • Thomas to lead discussion on Security profile