Re: Pretty printer binaries available
Thanks Gary – thrilled that you contributed our first tool.
Although I explicitly specified ssl/tls, port 21, and accepted certificate, seems to be rejecting the password spdx1 for user spdx
re:”With respect to some of your earlier questions,
· License Names and Pretty Printing – I was only able to extract the URL for the license (as a resource) from the SPDX document which doesn’t lead to a very pretty license name. Should we add a property License Name? Should I parse the URL and only print out the tag (e.g. after the #)?”
---> I’d like to go with parsing the URL and printing out the tag (after the #).
We ought to have an RDF document on our site for each license, and the License Name is a property of each license.
re: “Namespace and tags – I noticed in the example we have only one namespace for SPDX and the tags used in the example did not match the tags in the specification in all cases - e.g. License in the file is tagged FileLicense in the example. Do we want to have separate namespaces for File, License, and Document? If not, do we want the tags to be unique (e.g. FileLicense and PackageLicense)? Technically, the tags don’t need to be unique, but it may aid in humans reading the RDF/XML file.”
---> I think it’s ok to adopt in the RDF the non-unique (shorter) tags as in the specification. On one of the calls, the vibe from the group was for the shorter tags. (e.g. ‘License’, not ‘FileLicense’). Unfortunately I never sent around a new example incorporating that feedback (by then the zilb example was making the rounds). I think it is acceptable and correct to keep it in the same namespace.
On 8/10/10 11:19 PM, "Gary O'Neall" <gary@...> wrote:
I uploaded the pretty printer java program to the source auditor ftp server. It’s a secure web server, so I apologize in advance if it’s a bit inconvenient to download.
Knowledge Base Manager
Black Duck Software Inc.