2015-09-03¶

Archived page

Read-only copy of the SPDX wiki. The wiki is no longer active; its content has moved to https://github.com/spdx. Last edited 2015-09-03 by Podence.

Open Compliance Program - Kate¶

Motivations for relaunch:
Information on the web site is stale. (FOSSbazaar community isn't active anymore, etc.)
Recognition we need to make useful information more accessible to developers
The OSS world is changing- cybersecurity for example
FOSSology is coming into LF as a project
What’s happening
New look, new content
Highlighting open standards that help with compliance
Funneling people to projects and workgroups
Highlighting OSS and commercial tools that support SPDX
- FOSSology will help with upstream adoption
- Hope is to attract developers
Updating educational materials
- Currently only targeted at large organizations
- Putting the focus on what the developers need to know and will find useful.
Will be rolled out and announced in first part of Q4
New logos and branding for compliance
Target to get SPDX pages lined up to take advantage by start of October.
Current pillar approach will persist, but details under will change/consolidate
New Logo for SPDX
Group preference is for Option 2
Kate is looking for help in identifying companies and products using SPDX and the License List
Please send Kate pointer to any projects you're aware of that consume or produce SPDX
Jack suggested starting with what's on the SPDX page, and building up from there.

New development over the summer
Debsources DB now generating SPDX. work done as GSOC project by Orestis advised by Stefano Zacchiroli
some discussion about adding sha256 as alternative to sha1 for manditory field.
2.1 Progress
External package proposal from Yev reviewed and is slated to be included.
External ID proposal has some feedback on Debian Repository aspect which will be discussed on spdx-tech list
Some further work on Security inclusion for 2.1
Snippet work coming back to the fore of active discussions.

Some bug reports on template markups
Maintenance is getting burdensome
Triggered discussion about how to set License List up for multiple contributions
Somewhat like an open source project
Active work going on to define how it would work
Other discussions
MarkG working on proposal for handling standard headers
- Mark up existing
- Concept of suggested header for licenses that don’t have standard

Categories: General, Minutes