Technical Team/Minutes/2017-06-27

From SPDX Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

June 27, 2017

Attendees

  • Gary O’Neall
  • Thomas Steenberg
  • Anna Buhman
  • Krys Nuvadga
  • Alexios Zavras
  • Yev Bronshteyn
  • Uday Korlimarla
  • Kate Stewart
  • Aleksandr Lisianoi
  • Rohit Lodha
  • Philippe Ombredanne

GSoC Updates

  • Rohit – online tools
    • Verification complete
    • Conversion tools nearly complete
    • Would like to improve the Java tools to report line numbers for more validation errors
    • May complete the work before end of August and would like to contribute to the Java tools if complete early
  • Alex
    • Transpiling to JavaScript
    • Working on the Boolean expressions to support license expressions
    • Would like to produce NPM package
  • Krys
    • License scoring project
    • Able to get information from spec
    • Target working prototype by start of next week
    • Detailed information in the repo
    • Using the DJango framework
    • Philippe suggested getting the code working outside the framework first, then add a web framework
    • Philippe suggested having more SPDX examples
  • Anna
    • Github SPDX integration – scans automatically
    • Working on pull request approach to put SPDX document back into Repository
      • Philippe suggested having a github user for the server to create the pull requests
      • Gary suggested making that user configurable
      • This could also help with private repositories where the user configured could have access – but we agreed that private repos would not be in scope for this week

Update on Spec Repository

  • Thomas is working on OpenChain as well
  • Travis CI is still failing – Thomas is working on the last bug
  • Intent is to build all types of documents automatically (HTML, PDF, etc.)
  • Problem has to do with permissions

Next SPDX Specification

  • Discussed Yev’s proposal for more concise representation of relationships
    • Agreed to pursue approach
    • Yev will provide definitions (added to end of google docs)
  • Discussed alternative package alias proposal from Thomas – Agreed this is useful
    • Discussed whether to just change the cardinality of name to be multiple
    • Agreed on the additional name approach rather than changing the cardinality
    • Discussed alternateName or packageAlternateName – tag/value would be packageAlternateName, RDF would be alternateName
    • Discussed if we still need to require packageName if alternateName is provided – agreed to require packageName for compatibility reasons
    • Does alternatative name apply to other SPDX element?
      • Could be useful for license names – follow-up with legal team
      • Snippet names – not useful
      • Document names – not useful
      • File names – could be useful, but a different semantic and would be treated differently