Date   

Re: Thursday SPDX General Meeting Reminder - joining forces with 3T SBOM

Santiago Torres Arias
 

Exciting indeed!

Looking forward to this!
-Santiago

On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 07:40:08PM +0000, Phil Odence wrote:
An exciting development!

As you may know, there have been a handful of groups working on standardizing SBOMs. Kate and Gary have been working closely with the 3T SBOM group for some time. Our missions are sufficiently aligned that we will be joining forces to evolve SPDX. Those folks will be attending various SPDX meetings including the General meeting.

In Thursday’s General meeting, Kay Williams and Bob Martin will provide some background on 3T SBOM and their perspective on joining forces. We will also add reports from the teams developing the various profiles to our regular agenda. The 3T folks have been working on and will report on the Integrity and Defects profiles.

GENERAL MEETING

Meeting Time: Thurs, Feb 4, 8am PT / 10 am CT / 11am ET / 15:00 UTC. https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.timeanddate.com_worldclock_converter.html&d=DwIF-g&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=yZMPY-APGKyVIX7HgQFZJA&m=QGAwOVKtyK7NEY8Sc-t8hFvJTUzMmO4fSR-hXyx-LNA&s=yQ86S-deYrQzmsEx3OxiPmaN6ABCd1yZ9D3VPHYr774&e= <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.timeanddate.com_worldclock_converter.html&d=DwMGaQ&c=DPL6_X_6JkXFx7AXWqB0tg&r=CGsG_HWslMnHmDRZngTUv7VswbuEgSDQQD-XjX0ZZFc&m=aTno2MdPkEyWeFF6NtTVsvkwhro4X8E0ghAjdiaNKPY&s=ZE9sYJcHMoEO3g5qrPPuiKU0gFK7mMjd9Km_ClCNBbU&e=>

Conf call dial-in:
New dial in number: 415-881-1586<tel:(415)%20881-1586>
No PIN needed
The weblink for screenshare will stay the same at:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__uberconference.com_SPDXTeam&d=DwIF-g&c=slrrB7dE8n7gBJbeO0g-IQ&r=yZMPY-APGKyVIX7HgQFZJA&m=QGAwOVKtyK7NEY8Sc-t8hFvJTUzMmO4fSR-hXyx-LNA&s=87cqKCcqOd1tR-1A4e3gQcrdaDev8_RyeQXCIV6LI60&e= <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__uberconference.com_SPDXTeam&d=DwMGaQ&c=DPL6_X_6JkXFx7AXWqB0tg&r=CGsG_HWslMnHmDRZngTUv7VswbuEgSDQQD-XjX0ZZFc&m=aTno2MdPkEyWeFF6NtTVsvkwhro4X8E0ghAjdiaNKPY&s=kDOWmrCVDSRX7jiE8p__nxk6fjEvfyeLaSfkKXjXPno&e=>

Administrative Agenda
Attendance
Minutes Approval

3T SBOM Intro - Kay/Bob

Technical Team Report – Kate/Gary/Others

* Specification and Profiles
* Overview
* Core
* Legal
* Integrity
* Defects
* Usage and Other Emerging
* Tooling

Legal Team Report – Jilayne/Paul/Steve

Outreach/Website Team Report – Jack







Thursday SPDX General Meeting Reminder - joining forces with 3T SBOM

Phil Odence
 

An exciting development!

 

As you may know, there have been a handful of groups working on standardizing SBOMs. Kate and Gary have been working closely with the 3T SBOM group for some time. Our missions are sufficiently aligned that we will be joining forces to evolve SPDX. Those folks will be attending various SPDX meetings including the General meeting.

 

In Thursday’s General meeting, Kay Williams and Bob Martin will provide some background on 3T SBOM and their perspective on joining forces. We will also add reports from the teams developing the various profiles to our regular agenda. The 3T folks have been working on and will report on the Integrity and Defects profiles.

 

GENERAL MEETING

 

Meeting Time: Thurs, Feb 4, 8am PT / 10 am CT / 11am ET / 15:00 UTC.  http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html


Conf call dial-in:

New dial in number: 415-881-1586

No PIN needed

The weblink for screenshare will stay the same at: 
http://uberconference.com/SPDXTeam

 

Administrative Agenda

Attendance

Minutes Approva

 

3T SBOM Intro - Kay/Bob

 

Technical Team Report – Kate/Gary/Others

  • Specification and Profiles
    • Overview
    • Core
    • Legal
    • Integrity
    • Defects
    • Usage and Other Emerging
  • Tooling

 

Legal Team Report – Jilayne/Paul/Steve

 

Outreach/Website Team Report – Jack

  

 


Re: [spdx-tech] [spdx] Usage profile for SPDX3.0 - proposal from OpenChain Japan WG -

Takahashi, Kentaro
 

Thank you for your kind support Kate-san !


Best regards,

Kentaro Takahashi

-----Original Message-----
From: Spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org [mailto:Spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org] On Behalf
Of Kate Stewart
Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2021 12:27 AM
To: spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org
Cc: SPDX-general <spdx@lists.spdx.org>
Subject: [spdx-tech] [spdx] Usage profile for SPDX3.0 - proposal from
OpenChain Japan WG -

Thanks for sending this Takahashi-san.


I'm forwarding this email for discussion on the spdx-tech mailing list
where the usage profile will be discussed. spdx-tech is where we
are discussing the profiles. spdx-general is low volume, and more
for announcements.

Will follow up on the spdx-tech mail list.

Thanks, Kate

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Takahashi, Kentaro <kentaro_takahashi@mail.toyota.co.jp
<mailto:kentaro_takahashi@mail.toyota.co.jp> >
Date: Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 8:57 AM
Subject: [spdx] Usage profile for SPDX3.0 - proposal from OpenChain Japan
WG -
To: spdx@lists.spdx.org <mailto:spdx@lists.spdx.org> <spdx@lists.spdx.org
<mailto:spdx@lists.spdx.org> >



Dear members,



We are in the license information exchange sub group under OpenChain Japan
WG, and would like to propose usage profile for SPDX3.0 on this mailing list
based on Kate's suggestion as follows:



How can we describe "Reference to Local/Contract Documents" with External
Document Ref Tag?



(1) Proposal of usage profile: including OSS policy and/or contract information
on the SPDX (at chain basis) As each company would have own OSS policy,
OSS related inconsistency may be arisen at each deal(each supply chain).
Generally, this kind of policy would be defined in the closed / local document
such as policy, agreement, contract, and/or SPEC under each chain, and as
such, it would not be applicable for SPDX2.2 for the moment.
However, for the purpose of clear data exchange at supply chain basis and of
whole data exchange management, we would like to include OSS policy and/or
contract information on the SPDX3.0 at chain basis.



(2)How can we do?
For example, restricted OSS license may be identified in the OSS policy. Also,
such OSS license may be approved only for prototype.
Accordingly, we are focused on "External Document References", "UsageInfo",
"ValidUntil" to describe such information exchange with the following (A)-(D):


(A)In order to refer to the machine readable "Agreement" in relation to product
development between company A and company B.:
ExternalDocumentRef: DocumentRef-Agreement_Btw_A_B
file://anyware_but_not_disclosed_to_open/Agreement_Btw_A_B.txt
Checksum_for_for_Agreement_Btw_A_B
Or
ExternalDocumentRef: DocumentRef-Agreement_Btw_A_B "Specific ID,
Effective As Of or any other common identifier between supplier A and
consumer B" Checksum_for_Agreement_Btw_A_B

(B)In order to describe UsageInfo for product defined in the Agreement
between A and B:
DocumentRef-ThisSPDXID: SPDXID PREREQUISITE_FOR
TargetProductInfo-ThisSPDXID
TargetProductInfo: TargetProductinfo-ThisSPDXID "Product Name which
worte in Agreement_Btw_A_B"

(C)In order to pick up UsageInfo description about package "X" from the
Agreement between A and B:
Package Description about "X".....
UsageInfo:<text> "Only for Verification but not for Final Product" </text>
(Picked up from "Agreement_Btw_A_B").

(D)In order to define Expiration of This SPDX Document on Product
Development:
ValidUntil: <text>"Next Scheduled Delivery of SPDX Doc"</text>



We are looking forward to receive any feedback from others on this matter.


Thank you in advance!



Best regards,



Kentaro Takahashi

Intellectual Property Div.
TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION

Attention: The information contained in this email may be attorney/client
privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the
recipient(s) named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by
reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this e-mail message. Thank you.







Usage profile for SPDX3.0 - proposal from OpenChain Japan WG -

Kate Stewart
 

Thanks for sending this Takahashi-san.

I'm forwarding this email for discussion on the spdx-tech mailing list
where the usage profile will be discussed.   spdx-tech is where we
are discussing the profiles.   spdx-general is low volume, and more 
for announcements.

Will follow up on the spdx-tech mail list.

Thanks,  Kate

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Takahashi, Kentaro <kentaro_takahashi@...>
Date: Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 8:57 AM
Subject: [spdx] Usage profile for SPDX3.0 - proposal from OpenChain Japan WG -
To: spdx@... <spdx@...>


Dear members,



We are in the license information exchange sub group under OpenChain Japan WG, and would like to propose usage profile for SPDX3.0 on this mailing list based on Kate's suggestion as follows:



How can we describe "Reference to Local/Contract Documents" with External Document Ref Tag?



(1) Proposal of usage profile: including OSS policy and/or contract information on the SPDX (at chain basis) As each company would have own OSS policy, OSS related inconsistency may be arisen at each deal(each supply chain).
Generally, this kind of policy would be defined in the closed / local document such as policy, agreement, contract, and/or SPEC  under each chain, and as such, it would not be applicable for SPDX2.2 for the moment.
However, for the purpose of clear data exchange at supply chain basis and of whole data exchange management, we would like to include OSS policy and/or contract information on the SPDX3.0 at chain basis.



(2)How can we do?
For example, restricted OSS license may be identified in the OSS policy. Also, such OSS license may be approved only for prototype.
Accordingly, we are focused on "External Document References", "UsageInfo", "ValidUntil" to describe such information exchange with the following (A)-(D):


(A)In order to refer to the machine readable "Agreement" in relation to product development between company A and company B.:
ExternalDocumentRef: DocumentRef-Agreement_Btw_A_B file://anyware_but_not_disclosed_to_open/Agreement_Btw_A_B.txt Checksum_for_for_Agreement_Btw_A_B
        Or
ExternalDocumentRef: DocumentRef-Agreement_Btw_A_B "Specific ID, Effective As Of or any other common identifier between supplier A and consumer B" Checksum_for_Agreement_Btw_A_B

(B)In order to describe UsageInfo for product defined in the Agreement between A and B:
DocumentRef-ThisSPDXID: SPDXID PREREQUISITE_FOR TargetProductInfo-ThisSPDXID
TargetProductInfo: TargetProductinfo-ThisSPDXID "Product Name which worte in Agreement_Btw_A_B"

(C)In order to pick up UsageInfo description about package "X" from the Agreement between A and B:
Package Description about "X".....
UsageInfo:<text> "Only for Verification but not for Final Product" </text>   (Picked up from "Agreement_Btw_A_B").

(D)In order to define Expiration of This SPDX Document on Product Development:
ValidUntil: <text>"Next Scheduled Delivery of SPDX Doc"</text>



We are looking forward to receive any feedback from others on this matter.


Thank you in advance!



Best regards,



Kentaro Takahashi

Intellectual Property Div.
TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION

Attention: The information contained in this email may be attorney/client privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this e-mail message. Thank you.






Usage profile for SPDX3.0 - proposal from OpenChain Japan WG -

Takahashi, Kentaro
 

Dear members,



We are in the license information exchange sub group under OpenChain Japan WG, and would like to propose usage profile for SPDX3.0 on this mailing list based on Kate's suggestion as follows:



How can we describe "Reference to Local/Contract Documents" with External Document Ref Tag?



(1) Proposal of usage profile: including OSS policy and/or contract information on the SPDX (at chain basis) As each company would have own OSS policy, OSS related inconsistency may be arisen at each deal(each supply chain).
Generally, this kind of policy would be defined in the closed / local document such as policy, agreement, contract, and/or SPEC under each chain, and as such, it would not be applicable for SPDX2.2 for the moment.
However, for the purpose of clear data exchange at supply chain basis and of whole data exchange management, we would like to include OSS policy and/or contract information on the SPDX3.0 at chain basis.



(2)How can we do?
For example, restricted OSS license may be identified in the OSS policy. Also, such OSS license may be approved only for prototype.
Accordingly, we are focused on "External Document References", "UsageInfo", "ValidUntil" to describe such information exchange with the following (A)-(D):


(A)In order to refer to the machine readable "Agreement" in relation to product development between company A and company B.:
ExternalDocumentRef: DocumentRef-Agreement_Btw_A_B file://anyware_but_not_disclosed_to_open/Agreement_Btw_A_B.txt Checksum_for_for_Agreement_Btw_A_B
Or
ExternalDocumentRef: DocumentRef-Agreement_Btw_A_B "Specific ID, Effective As Of or any other common identifier between supplier A and consumer B" Checksum_for_Agreement_Btw_A_B

(B)In order to describe UsageInfo for product defined in the Agreement between A and B:
DocumentRef-ThisSPDXID: SPDXID PREREQUISITE_FOR TargetProductInfo-ThisSPDXID
TargetProductInfo: TargetProductinfo-ThisSPDXID "Product Name which worte in Agreement_Btw_A_B"

(C)In order to pick up UsageInfo description about package "X" from the Agreement between A and B:
Package Description about "X".....
UsageInfo:<text> "Only for Verification but not for Final Product" </text> (Picked up from "Agreement_Btw_A_B").

(D)In order to define Expiration of This SPDX Document on Product Development:
ValidUntil: <text>"Next Scheduled Delivery of SPDX Doc"</text>



We are looking forward to receive any feedback from others on this matter.


Thank you in advance!



Best regards,



Kentaro Takahashi

Intellectual Property Div.
TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION

Attention: The information contained in this email may be attorney/client privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of this e-mail message. Thank you.


Re: Referencing external spdx documents with package information from project.spdx.yml

Gary O'Neall
 

Moving this from spdx general list to spdx-tech list.

 

Greetings Stephanie,

 

If you are referring to an external SPDX document, you will want to use the ExternalSpdxDocument rather than ExternalRef.

 

The serialization format for the ExternalSpdxDocument varies quite a bit between the different file formats.

 

For YAML, the top level document will have a field externalDocumentRefs which lists all documents which are referenced.  For example:

 

externalDocumentRefs:

- externalDocumentId: "DocumentRef-spdx-tool-1.2"

  checksum:

    algorithm: "SHA1"

    checksumValue: "d6a770ba38583ed4bb4525bd96e50461655d2759"

  spdxDocument: "http://spdx.org/spdxdocs/spdx-tools-v1.2-3F2504E0-4F89-41D3-9A0C-0305E82C3301"

 

When there an element in the external document referenced, the syntax is externalDocumentId:SPDXRef-XXX where the SPDXRef-XXX is the SPDX reference in the external document.

 

For example:

relationships:

- spdxElementId: "SPDXRef-DOCUMENT"

  relatedSpdxElement: "DocumentRef-spdx-tool-1.2:SPDXRef-ToolsElement"

  relationshipType: "COPY_OF"

 

This is a similar approach to how the Tag/Value fields are parsed.

 

Note that this is an area of active discussion for the 3.0 Spec.  We all are finding the ExternalDocumentRef’s confusing and we will be renaming the fields at a minimum.  There is also some discussion on changing the model related to external document ref’s.  We will probably be discussing this on upcoming SPDX tech calls.  It has been proposed that we reintroduce the ExternalSpdxElement in the model for 3.0.

 

The SPDX YAML example includes an external document reference.

 

Best regards,
Gary

 

From: spdx@... <spdx@...> On Behalf Of Neubauer Stephanie (IOC/PDL4) via lists.spdx.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 4:40 AM
To: spdx@...
Cc: Schuberth Sebastian (IOC/PDL1) <Sebastian.Schuberth@...>
Subject: [spdx] Referencing external spdx documents with package information from project.spdx.yml

 

Hello J

 

I am currently working on an issue in the Oss-Review-Toolkit  [1] to support referring to external SPDX files from a `project.spdx.yml` [2].

 

I am currently checking out the spdx-specs [3] and the spdx schema [4] to create a working example of an ´project.spdx.yml` which has a package referencing an external SPDX document for  its metadata.

In the example file provided in [5]  I could not find a reference of that sort.

I have tried using `externalRefs` parameter of a package in the spdx document, but didn’t achieve actually referencing an external spdx document.

In the last paragraph of the spdx/tools repository [6] I have found a mention of “ExternalSpdxElement” that is not in the 2.0 model anymore. Has this been replaced in some way?

 

I wondered if there was an actual example in one of the documentations or repositories that shows:

A project.spdx.yml listing a package

and in that package metadata refer to

additional metadata in the form of a package.spdx.yml (or something similar)

 

Here is a slightly changed project.spdx.yml (originally from [7]) that shows how I would imagine the mechanisms working:

SPDXID: "SPDXRef-DOCUMENT"

spdxVersion: "SPDX-2.2"

creationInfo:

  created: "2020-07-23T18:30:22Z"

  creators:

  - "Organization: Example Inc."

  - "Person: Thomas Steenbergen"

  licenseListVersion: "3.9"

name: "xyz-0.1.0"

dataLicense: "CC0-1.0"

documentNamespace: "http://spdx.org/spdxdocs/spdx-document-xyz"

documentDescribes:

- "SPDXRef-Package-xyz"

packages:

- SPDXID: "SPDXRef-Package-xyz"

  description: "Awesome product created by Example Inc."

  copyrightText: "Copyright (C) 2020 Example Inc."

  downloadLocation: "git+ssh://gitlab.example.com:3389/products/xyz.git@b2c358080011af6a366d2512a25a379fbe7b1f78"

  filesAnalyzed: false

  homepage: "https://example.com/products/xyz"

  licenseConcluded:  "NOASSERTION"

  licenseDeclared: "Apache-2.0 AND curl AND LicenseRef-Proprietary-ExampleInc"

  name: "xyz"

  versionInfo: "0.1.0"

- SPDXID: "SPDXRef-Package-curl"

  externalRefs:

    referenceCategory: "OTHER"

    referenceLocator: "curl:7.70.0" (or similar way of giving an identifier)

    referenceType: https://github.com/oss-review-toolkit/ort/blob/master/analyzer/src/funTest/assets/projects/synthetic/spdx/package/libs/curl/package.spdx.yml (alternatively a relative path to the same file locally could be given here)

OR:       - SPDXID: "SPDXRef-Package-curl"

  externalSpdxDocument:

    documentUri: https://github.com/oss-review-toolkit/ort/blob/master/analyzer/src/funTest/assets/projects/synthetic/spdx/package/libs/curl/package.spdx.yml (alternatively a relative path to the same file locally could be given here)

    id: SPDXDocumentRef-curl

relationships:

- spdxElementId: "SPDXRef-Package-xyz"

  relatedSpdxElement: "SPDXRef-Package-curl"

  relationshipType: "DEPENDS_ON"

 

 

[1] https://github.com/oss-review-toolkit/ort

[2] https://github.com/oss-review-toolkit/ort/issues/3402

[3] https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/3-package-information/#321-external-reference

[4] https://github.com/spdx/spdx-spec/blob/development/v2.2.1/schemas/spdx-schema.json

[5] https://github.com/spdx/spdx-spec/blob/development/v2.2.1/examples/SPDXYAMLExample-2.2.spdx.yaml

[6] https://github.com/spdx/tools#upgrading-to-spdx-20

[7] https://github.com/oss-review-toolkit/ort/blob/master/analyzer/src/funTest/assets/projects/synthetic/spdx/project/project.spdx.yml

 

Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards

Stephanie Neubauer


Project Delivery Stuttgart (IOC/PDL4)
Robert Bosch GmbH | Postfach 11 27 | 71301 Waiblingen | GERMANY |
www.bosch.com
Tel. +49 711 811-92528 | Mobil +49 172 3620267 | Telefax +49 711 811-58200 |
Threema / Threema Work: PHCV2F36 | Stephanie.Neubauer@...

Sitz: Stuttgart, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 14000;
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Franz Fehrenbach; Geschäftsführung: Dr. Volkmar Denner,
Prof. Dr. Stefan Asenkerschbaumer, Filiz Albrecht, Dr. Michael Bolle, Dr. Christian Fischer,
Dr. Stefan Hartung, Dr. Markus Heyn, Harald Kröger, Rolf Najork, Uwe Raschke


Re: "X.org Preferred License"

Till Jaeger
 

Hi Alan,

Your Firefox extension works really well. Thanks for this great tool!

Best,

Till

Am 14.01.21 um 22:26 schrieb Alan Tse:

Hi Mark,

I’m also not sure of which SPDX tool you were using but I checked with
the browser extension spdx-license-diff
<https://github.com/spdx/spdx-license-diff> and I get a template match
to MIT since the extra part is optional as described by Steve.

 

Of course if you do use the browser extension and you see missing
template matches with it (which I find occasionally), I’ll fix it if you
report it <https://github.com/spdx/spdx-license-diff/issues>.

 

Alan

 

*From: *<spdx@lists.spdx.org> on behalf of Steve Winslow
<swinslow@linuxfoundation.org>
*Reply-To: *"spdx@lists.spdx.org" <spdx@lists.spdx.org>
*Date: *Thursday, January 14, 2021 at 12:47 PM
*To: *"spdx@lists.spdx.org" <spdx@lists.spdx.org>
*Cc: *Kate Stewart <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org>, "Atwood, Mark"
<atwoodm@amazon.com>
*Subject: *Re: [spdx] "X.org Preferred License"

 

*CAUTION:**This email originated from outside of Western Digital. Do not
click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and
know that the content is safe.*

 

Hi Mark,

 

The MIT license template on the license list [1] has the language
"(including the next paragraph)" as optional text, which is why that
part shows up in blue italics on the list [2].

 

I think that's what you're referring to, but let me know if I'm missing
something.

 

Best,

Steve

 

[1]
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/a32a839b7385c9a797a26fa45c6f6234947b7abe/src/MIT.xml#L22

[2] https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT.html

 

On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 3:19 PM Mark Atwood via lists.spdx.org
<http://lists.spdx.org> <atwoodm=amazon.com@lists.spdx.org
<mailto:amazon.com@lists.spdx.org>> wrote:

The "X.org Preferred License" documented at [
https://www.x.org/archive/current/doc/xorg-docs/License.html ] is
the MIT
license with the additional text in the middle "(including the next
paragraph)".

Our SPDX license matching tool is not locking onto it with 100%, but
instead
is showing it nearest edit distance to MIT.  I've not yet dug in deeper,
but,

Is the X.org variant in the SPDX database?
If not should we add it as an new license, or as matching rule
variant to
MIT?

If its not in the database, I will start the legwork and paperwork
to add
it.

..m


Mark Atwood <atwoodm@amazon.com <mailto:atwoodm@amazon.com>>
Principal, Open Source
+1-206-604-2198








--

Steve Winslow
Director of Strategic Programs
The Linux Foundation

swinslow@linuxfoundation.org <mailto:swinslow@linuxfoundation.org>


Re: "X.org Preferred License"

Steve Kilbane
 

I'm glad this topic came up, because I hadn't heard of spdx-license-diff before, and now I have it installed. That's a pretty good start to a Friday!

 

Thanks, Alan!

 

steve

 

From: spdx@... <spdx@...> On Behalf Of Alan Tse
Sent: 14 January 2021 21:26
To: spdx@...
Cc: Kate Stewart <kstewart@...>; Atwood, Mark <atwoodm@...>
Subject: Re: [spdx] "X.org Preferred License"

 

[External]

 

Hi Mark,

I’m also not sure of which SPDX tool you were using but I checked with the browser extension spdx-license-diff and I get a template match to MIT since the extra part is optional as described by Steve.

 

Of course if you do use the browser extension and you see missing template matches with it (which I find occasionally), I’ll fix it if you report it.

 

Alan

 

From: <spdx@...> on behalf of Steve Winslow <swinslow@...>
Reply-To: "spdx@..." <spdx@...>
Date: Thursday, January 14, 2021 at 12:47 PM
To: "spdx@..." <spdx@...>
Cc: Kate Stewart <kstewart@...>, "Atwood, Mark" <atwoodm@...>
Subject: Re: [spdx] "X.org Preferred License"

 

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of Western Digital. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know that the content is safe.

 

Hi Mark,

 

The MIT license template on the license list [1] has the language "(including the next paragraph)" as optional text, which is why that part shows up in blue italics on the list [2].

 

I think that's what you're referring to, but let me know if I'm missing something.

 

Best,

Steve

 

 

On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 3:19 PM Mark Atwood via lists.spdx.org <atwoodm=amazon.com@...> wrote:

The "X.org Preferred License" documented at [
https://www.x.org/archive/current/doc/xorg-docs/License.html ] is the MIT
license with the additional text in the middle "(including the next
paragraph)".

Our SPDX license matching tool is not locking onto it with 100%, but instead
is showing it nearest edit distance to MIT.  I've not yet dug in deeper,
but,

Is the X.org variant in the SPDX database?
If not should we add it as an new license, or as matching rule variant to
MIT?

If its not in the database, I will start the legwork and paperwork to add
it.

..m


Mark Atwood <atwoodm@...>
Principal, Open Source
+1-206-604-2198







--

Steve Winslow
Director of Strategic Programs
The Linux Foundation


Re: "X.org Preferred License"

Mark Atwood
 

Thanks, and I see it’s already done.  Now I need to see why my tool isn’t matching it.

 

..m

 

From: Steve Winslow <swinslow@...>
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2021 12:47 PM
To: spdx@...
Cc: Kate Stewart <kstewart@...>; Atwood, Mark <atwoodm@...>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] [spdx] "X.org Preferred License"

 

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe.

 

Hi Mark,

 

The MIT license template on the license list [1] has the language "(including the next paragraph)" as optional text, which is why that part shows up in blue italics on the list [2].

 

I think that's what you're referring to, but let me know if I'm missing something.

 

Best,

Steve

 

 

On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 3:19 PM Mark Atwood via lists.spdx.org <atwoodm=amazon.com@...> wrote:

The "X.org Preferred License" documented at [
https://www.x.org/archive/current/doc/xorg-docs/License.html ] is the MIT
license with the additional text in the middle "(including the next
paragraph)".

Our SPDX license matching tool is not locking onto it with 100%, but instead
is showing it nearest edit distance to MIT.  I've not yet dug in deeper,
but,

Is the X.org variant in the SPDX database?
If not should we add it as an new license, or as matching rule variant to
MIT?

If its not in the database, I will start the legwork and paperwork to add
it.

..m


Mark Atwood <atwoodm@...>
Principal, Open Source
+1-206-604-2198








--

Steve Winslow
Director of Strategic Programs
The Linux Foundation


Re: "X.org Preferred License"

Alan Tse
 

Hi Mark,

I’m also not sure of which SPDX tool you were using but I checked with the browser extension spdx-license-diff and I get a template match to MIT since the extra part is optional as described by Steve.

 

Of course if you do use the browser extension and you see missing template matches with it (which I find occasionally), I’ll fix it if you report it.

 

Alan

 

From: <spdx@...> on behalf of Steve Winslow <swinslow@...>
Reply-To: "spdx@..." <spdx@...>
Date: Thursday, January 14, 2021 at 12:47 PM
To: "spdx@..." <spdx@...>
Cc: Kate Stewart <kstewart@...>, "Atwood, Mark" <atwoodm@...>
Subject: Re: [spdx] "X.org Preferred License"

 

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of Western Digital. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know that the content is safe.

 

Hi Mark,

 

The MIT license template on the license list [1] has the language "(including the next paragraph)" as optional text, which is why that part shows up in blue italics on the list [2].

 

I think that's what you're referring to, but let me know if I'm missing something.

 

Best,

Steve

 

 

On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 3:19 PM Mark Atwood via lists.spdx.org <atwoodm=amazon.com@...> wrote:

The "X.org Preferred License" documented at [
https://www.x.org/archive/current/doc/xorg-docs/License.html ] is the MIT
license with the additional text in the middle "(including the next
paragraph)".

Our SPDX license matching tool is not locking onto it with 100%, but instead
is showing it nearest edit distance to MIT.  I've not yet dug in deeper,
but,

Is the X.org variant in the SPDX database?
If not should we add it as an new license, or as matching rule variant to
MIT?

If its not in the database, I will start the legwork and paperwork to add
it.

..m


Mark Atwood <atwoodm@...>
Principal, Open Source
+1-206-604-2198








--

Steve Winslow
Director of Strategic Programs
The Linux Foundation


Re: "X.org Preferred License"

Steve Winslow
 

Hi Mark,

The MIT license template on the license list [1] has the language "(including the next paragraph)" as optional text, which is why that part shows up in blue italics on the list [2].

I think that's what you're referring to, but let me know if I'm missing something.

Best,
Steve


On Thu, Jan 14, 2021 at 3:19 PM Mark Atwood via lists.spdx.org <atwoodm=amazon.com@...> wrote:
The "X.org Preferred License" documented at [
https://www.x.org/archive/current/doc/xorg-docs/License.html ] is the MIT
license with the additional text in the middle "(including the next
paragraph)".

Our SPDX license matching tool is not locking onto it with 100%, but instead
is showing it nearest edit distance to MIT.  I've not yet dug in deeper,
but,

Is the X.org variant in the SPDX database?
If not should we add it as an new license, or as matching rule variant to
MIT?

If its not in the database, I will start the legwork and paperwork to add
it.

..m


Mark Atwood <atwoodm@...>
Principal, Open Source
+1-206-604-2198









--
Steve Winslow
Director of Strategic Programs
The Linux Foundation


"X.org Preferred License"

Mark Atwood
 

The "X.org Preferred License" documented at [
https://www.x.org/archive/current/doc/xorg-docs/License.html ] is the MIT
license with the additional text in the middle "(including the next
paragraph)".

Our SPDX license matching tool is not locking onto it with 100%, but instead
is showing it nearest edit distance to MIT. I've not yet dug in deeper,
but,

Is the X.org variant in the SPDX database?
If not should we add it as an new license, or as matching rule variant to
MIT?

If its not in the database, I will start the legwork and paperwork to add
it.

..m


Mark Atwood <atwoodm@amazon.com>
Principal, Open Source
+1-206-604-2198


Referencing external spdx documents with package information from project.spdx.yml

Neubauer Stephanie (IOC/PDL4)
 

Hello J

 

I am currently working on an issue in the Oss-Review-Toolkit  [1] to support referring to external SPDX files from a `project.spdx.yml` [2].

 

I am currently checking out the spdx-specs [3] and the spdx schema [4] to create a working example of an ´project.spdx.yml` which has a package referencing an external SPDX document for  its metadata.

In the example file provided in [5]  I could not find a reference of that sort.

I have tried using `externalRefs` parameter of a package in the spdx document, but didn’t achieve actually referencing an external spdx document.

In the last paragraph of the spdx/tools repository [6] I have found a mention of “ExternalSpdxElement” that is not in the 2.0 model anymore. Has this been replaced in some way?

 

I wondered if there was an actual example in one of the documentations or repositories that shows:

A project.spdx.yml listing a package

and in that package metadata refer to

additional metadata in the form of a package.spdx.yml (or something similar)

 

Here is a slightly changed project.spdx.yml (originally from [7]) that shows how I would imagine the mechanisms working:

SPDXID: "SPDXRef-DOCUMENT"

spdxVersion: "SPDX-2.2"

creationInfo:

  created: "2020-07-23T18:30:22Z"

  creators:

  - "Organization: Example Inc."

  - "Person: Thomas Steenbergen"

  licenseListVersion: "3.9"

name: "xyz-0.1.0"

dataLicense: "CC0-1.0"

documentNamespace: "http://spdx.org/spdxdocs/spdx-document-xyz"

documentDescribes:

- "SPDXRef-Package-xyz"

packages:

- SPDXID: "SPDXRef-Package-xyz"

  description: "Awesome product created by Example Inc."

  copyrightText: "Copyright (C) 2020 Example Inc."

  downloadLocation: "git+ssh://gitlab.example.com:3389/products/xyz.git@b2c358080011af6a366d2512a25a379fbe7b1f78"

  filesAnalyzed: false

  homepage: "https://example.com/products/xyz"

  licenseConcluded:  "NOASSERTION"

  licenseDeclared: "Apache-2.0 AND curl AND LicenseRef-Proprietary-ExampleInc"

  name: "xyz"

  versionInfo: "0.1.0"

- SPDXID: "SPDXRef-Package-curl"

  externalRefs:

    referenceCategory: "OTHER"

    referenceLocator: "curl:7.70.0" (or similar way of giving an identifier)

    referenceType: https://github.com/oss-review-toolkit/ort/blob/master/analyzer/src/funTest/assets/projects/synthetic/spdx/package/libs/curl/package.spdx.yml (alternatively a relative path to the same file locally could be given here)

OR:       - SPDXID: "SPDXRef-Package-curl"

  externalSpdxDocument:

    documentUri: https://github.com/oss-review-toolkit/ort/blob/master/analyzer/src/funTest/assets/projects/synthetic/spdx/package/libs/curl/package.spdx.yml (alternatively a relative path to the same file locally could be given here)

    id: SPDXDocumentRef-curl

relationships:

- spdxElementId: "SPDXRef-Package-xyz"

  relatedSpdxElement: "SPDXRef-Package-curl"

  relationshipType: "DEPENDS_ON"

 

 

[1] https://github.com/oss-review-toolkit/ort

[2] https://github.com/oss-review-toolkit/ort/issues/3402

[3] https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/3-package-information/#321-external-reference

[4] https://github.com/spdx/spdx-spec/blob/development/v2.2.1/schemas/spdx-schema.json

[5] https://github.com/spdx/spdx-spec/blob/development/v2.2.1/examples/SPDXYAMLExample-2.2.spdx.yaml

[6] https://github.com/spdx/tools#upgrading-to-spdx-20

[7] https://github.com/oss-review-toolkit/ort/blob/master/analyzer/src/funTest/assets/projects/synthetic/spdx/project/project.spdx.yml

 

Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Best regards

Stephanie Neubauer


Project Delivery Stuttgart (IOC/PDL4)
Robert Bosch GmbH | Postfach 11 27 | 71301 Waiblingen | GERMANY |
www.bosch.com
Tel. +49 711 811-92528 | Mobil +49 172 3620267 | Telefax +49 711 811-58200 |
Threema / Threema Work: PHCV2F36 | Stephanie.Neubauer@...

Sitz: Stuttgart, Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 14000;
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Franz Fehrenbach; Geschäftsführung: Dr. Volkmar Denner,
Prof. Dr. Stefan Asenkerschbaumer, Filiz Albrecht, Dr. Michael Bolle, Dr. Christian Fischer,
Dr. Stefan Hartung, Dr. Markus Heyn, Harald Kröger, Rolf Najork, Uwe Raschke


SPDX General Meeting

Phil Odence
 

Here’s a new invite for 2021. Please accept the recurring meeting

Note there will be no SPDX General Meeting in January.

****

New dial in number: 415-881-1586  

No PIN needed

The weblink for screenshare:
https://www.uberconference.com/room/spdxteam


MEETING MINUTES FOR REVIEW: http://spdx.org/wiki/meeting-minutes-and-decisions



Canceled: SPDX General Meeting

Phil Odence
 

This is an old meeting. Please ignore.


Ignore meeting cancellation

Phil Odence
 

I am trying to remove a legacy event from an old calendar. I think you will receive a cancellation of this old meeting. Apologies, just ignore. We are on for a General Meeting next week.

Happy New Year,

Phil

 

L. Philip Odence

General Manager, Black Duck Audit Business

Synopsys Software Integrity Group, Burlington, MA

M (781) 258-9502 | phil.odence@...

https://www.synopsys.com/audits  

 

 

SIG-emailsig-2020

 

 

signature_563645916   signature_178014476   signature_690632922   signature_159772594

 


SPDX December General Meeting Minutes

Phil Odence
 

Happy Holidays, All. See you in 2021!

 

https://wiki.spdx.org/view/General_Meeting/Minutes/2020-12-03

 

General Meeting/Minutes/2020-12-03

General Meeting‎ | Minutes

·         Attendance: 11

·         Lead by Phil Odence

·         Minutes of Nov meeting Approved

 

Contents

 [hide

·         1 Tech Team Report - Gary

·         2 Legal Team Report - Paul/Jilayne/Steve

·         3 Outreach Team Report

·         4 Attendees

Tech Team Report - Gary[edit]

·         Spec

·         Nov, busy month

·         Mostly working on Base Model

·         Working on Relationships

·         Between, for example, files, packages, etc

·         Exploring verification methods, digital signatures, etc

·         Supporting Contains

·         This should clear the way to get more work done on the other profiles

·         Process work too

·         Hoping enough is in place after next meeting to remove blockers

·         Tools

·         New release of online tools is up

·         Quite significant

·         Much new functionality

·         As such, there will likely be issues

·         Report in GitHub or emailing Gary

·         There was a character encoding issues that was quickly resolved

·         New license list generator has improved the LL

·         Good work/improvements on Go libraries

·         THANKS, Rishabh

Legal Team Report - Paul/Jilayne/Steve[edit]

·         Main Nov work 3.11 License release

·         A little smaller than previous was

·         3.12 discussions starting today

·         Aiming for end of Jan

·         Dealing with a little backlog of new requests

·         Could use help, as usual

·         Documentation/Website

·         Core team has been overhauling

·         Updating License List page

·         Including moving to GitHub

Outreach Team Report[edit]

·         Aveek’s ideas for increasing SPDX Participation

·         Started discussing last meeting

·         Rough plan

·         Approach student communities at different schools

·         Give assignments to students or onboarding

·         e.g. Open Printing has a generic, easy, but comprehensive assignment defined

·         May need different ones for different technologies

·         Single point of contact to guide students

·         Perhaps students from previous years

·         Identify basic issues to assign

·         Encourage participation in GSOC and LFMP

·         Encourage previous students to mentor

·         Organize Virtual Meetups

·         From student groups in schools

·         Also has the idea of talking to other projects about benefits

·         Will start with Open Printing

Attendees[edit]

·         Phil Odence, Black Duck/Synopsys

·         David Wheeler, Linux Foundation

·         Rishabh Bhatnagar, St Francis Inst Tech

·         Aveek Basu, NextMark Printers

·         Steve Winslow, LF

·         Jilayne Lovejoy, Canonical

·         Mark Atwood, Amazon

·         Paul Madick

·         Mike Dolan, Linux Foundation

·         Jim Hutchison, Qualcomm

·         Rose Judge, VMware

 


Thursday SPDX General Meeting Reminder

Phil Odence
 

GENERAL MEETING

 

Meeting Time: Thurs, Dec 3, 8am PT / 10 am CT / 11am ET / 15:00 UTC.  http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html


Conf call dial-in:

New dial in number: 415-881-1586

No PIN needed

The weblink for screenshare will stay the same at: 
http://uberconference.com/SPDXTeam

 

Administrative Agenda

Attendance

Minutes Approvahttps://wiki.spdx.org/view/General_Meeting/Minutes/2020-11-05

 

 

Technical Team Report – Gary

 

Legal Team Report – Jilayne/Paul/Steve

 

Outreach Team Report – Jack

 

Any Cross Functional Issues –All

 

 


Thursday SPDX General Meeting Reminder

Phil Odence
 

 Sorry for the late notice.

 

Today we will have the standard agenda plus a walkthrough of the state of the 3.0 spec.

 

 

GENERAL MEETING

 

Meeting Time: Thurs, Nov 5, 8am PT / 10 am CT / 11am ET / 15:00 UTC.  http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html


Conf call dial-in:

New dial in number: 415-881-1586

No PIN needed

The weblink for screenshare will stay the same at: 
http://uberconference.com/SPDXTeam

 

Administrative Agenda

Attendance

Minutes Approva

 

Spec 3.0 walk through

 

Technical Team Report – Kate/Gary

 

Legal Team Report – Jilayne/Paul/Steve

 

Outreach Team Report – Jack

 

Any Cross Functional Issues –All

 

 


SPDX General Meeting Minutes and Webpage Update

Phil Odence
 

There was full support for the webpage updates at the General Meeting. The plan is on to move forward if no one raises any concerns in the next week. (text of update is at the bottom of this email)

 

Meeting minutes and link below

 

Thanks,

Phil

 

L. Philip Odence

General Manager, Black Duck Audit Business

Synopsys Software Integrity Group, Burlington, MA

M (781) 258-9502 | phil.odence@...

https://www.synopsys.com/audits  

 

 

SIG-emailsig-2020

 

 

signature_234117645   signature_858572913   signature_661693669   signature_167300685

 

 

Minutes:

https://wiki.spdx.org/view/General_Meeting/Minutes/2020-10-01

 

General Meeting/Minutes/2020-10-01

General Meeting‎ | Minutes

·         Attendance: 8

·         Lead by Phil Odence

·         Minutes of Sept meeting Approved

Contents

 [hide

·         1 Webpage Update- Phil

·         2 Tech Team Report - Steve standing in

·         3 Legal Team Report - Paul/Jilayne/Steve

·         4 Outreach Team Report

·         5 Attendees

Webpage Update- Phil[edit]

·         No objections to new copy for website

Tech Team Report - Steve standing in[edit]

·         Spec

·         DCO bot has been turned on for the spec

·         2.2.1

·         ISO requested more information

·         Developed and submitted

·         3.0

·         WilliamB has set up new branch

·         Still working on main profile

·         Minor mods for OMG/NTIA

·         Japan user group has provided inputs

·         Vulnerabilities Profile

·         Working with 3TS group

·         Linkage Profile

·         Name still up in the air

·         Something about of linking docs and vetting provenance

·         Build Profile

·         Kate working on looking at different built systems

·         Tools

·         Google SoC

·         All students passed. Congrats!

·         Rishabh has stayed involved and done some great work

·         Community Bridge

·         2 projects going

·         Tools.spdx.org

·         Funding is $2100 / $2400

·         All tools being transitioned

·         Test instance in place http://52.32.53.255/

·         Please Poke!

Legal Team Report - Paul/Jilayne/Steve[edit]

·         Licensing Profie

·         This has been the recent focus of the team

·         Simplify/Clarify what’s been in place

·         Working doc for initial draft: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k_2tSlFXvW_SbW-I1DcSEoCNBMQJd4FEFIQr6KCJuyU/edit#

·         Base + Licensing is targeted at the historical use case for SPDX

·         Next step will be to clean up the initial draft for further discussion

·         License List

·         Little change due to focus on Licensing Profile

·         Building up a little backlog

·         Minutes for Legal Team going forward keeps minutes here:

·         https://github.com/spdx/meetings

Outreach Team Report[edit]

·         No Update

 

Attendees[edit]

·         Phil Odence, Black Duck/Synopsys

·         Paul Madick

·         Rishabh Bhatnagar, St Francis Inst Tech

·         Aveek, NextMark Printers

·         Steve Winslow, LF

·         Jilayne Lovejoy, Canonical

·         Michael Herzog- nexB

·         Mike Dolan, Linux Foundation

 

 

From: Phil Odence <podence@...>
Date: Tuesday, September 29, 2020 at 4:00 PM
To: "spdx@..." <spdx@...>
Subject: SPDX Webpage Update

 

All,

The SPDX Core Team has been working on a long overdue update to some of the web content that describes the spec and the project. Below is what we’ve come up with. We think it’s good to go, but at the Thurs General Meeting will see if anyone has concerns that would merit scheduling a meeting to discuss in more detail.

Thanks,

Phil

 

 

----- Short summary for top of main page, https://spdx.dev/ and anywhere else a short summary is needed/used ------

SPDX is an open standard for communicating software bill of material information, including provenance, license, security, and other related information. SPDX reduces redundant work by providing common formats for organizations  and communities to share important data, thereby streamlining and improving compliance, security, and dependability.

 

------------ FOR NEW ABOUT PAGE ----------------------------

 

Our Vision

The vision of SPDX is to reduce redundant work by providing common formats for organizations and communities to share important data, thereby streamlining and improving compliance, security, and dependability. 

 

Our Mission

The mission of SPDX is to develop and promote open standards for communicating software bill of material information, including provenance, license, security, and other related information. 

 

About

SPDX is an open source project hosted by the Linux Foundation. The grass-roots effort includes representatives from a diverse set of organizations—software, systems and tool vendors, foundations and systems integrators. Work is done by two sub-groups: the tech team and the legal team. There is also a monthly general call which provides an overview of progress on the entire project. For more information about getting involved, see the Participate page.

 

The SPDX project is composed of:

  • The SPDX Specification itself
  • the SPDX License List (including exceptions, matching guidelines, license IDs, and license expression syntax)
  • SPDX tools and libraries for working with the SPDX documents and SPDX License List

 

Guiding principles

  • SPDX represents data in formats that are both machine- and human-readable.
  • SPDX focuses on collecting and communicating facts; and provides a framework to make assertions about those facts.
  • SPDX makes no legal interpretations (of licenses or license compliance).
  • SPDX facilitates the efficient exchange of metadata in the supply chain. 

 

Governance Model

The SPDX Governance model is documented here.

 

------------END  FOR NEW ABOUT PAGE ----------------------------

 

21 - 40 of 1395