Technical Team/Use Cases/2.0/Application which ships with documentation and media and software
From SPDX Wiki
- Title: Application which ships with documentation + media + software
- Primary Actor: Member of the application team
- Goal in Context: To include with the copyrightable artifacts distributed by the application SPDX data describing it's licensing information and the type of copyrightable artifacts and that this grouping belongs to this application. Typically applications will include not only source code and/or pre-built images but there will also be other copyrightable artifacts associated with it. These can include such things as media files, documentation (user guides, programming guides, API guides, help files, etc), Makefiles or other project files (e.g. IDE project files), scripts and so forth. Some may be machine generated and thus not have a copyright or license and other “incidental” project files may not have copyrights as well.
- Stakeholders and Interests:
- Application Provider:
- To communicate the licensing information for their copyrightable artifacts, the type of artifacts and that they are a logical grouping (they go with this application).
- To have their licenses respected
- To help consumers understand what they are getting.
- Consumers of application copyrightable artifacts:
- To receive accurate and clear information of licensing of artifacts
- To be able to comply easily with licenses for artifacts
- To be able to subset, extend, or aggregate artifacts and pass on clear authoritative verifiable license for the resulting new copyrightable artifacts.
- Application Provider:
- Application provider has selected licenses for the copyrightable artifacts originating with the project (package, files, etc)
- Software being brought in for the application (if any) has SPDX documents decsribing the copyrigthable artifacts.
- Main Success Scenario: Application Provider communicates accurate and complete licensing information for all copyrightable artifacts in an SPDX data format.
- Failed End Condition: Application Provider communicates inaccurate and/or incomplete licensing information for their copyrightable artifacts, or does not describe the type of artifact or does not express that this is a logical grouping (is this really a failure if the type of artifact at a minimum is expressed?).
- Application release
- Commit time?
- Checkout from a repository?
- Software being brought in from an external source
- Notes: It’s possible that some of the artifacts used by the application are in turn shared with other applications. For a single application this may not matter, but in the case of where many applications are aggregated together to form as an example an SDK then this is possible. Creating logical groupings and possibly even types of artifacts may involve manual intervention.
We should break down an application like this in the context of the 1.0 spec and really look at how it can be described and maybe how it could/should be described. Here is an example to put the artifacts in context: