Date   

Re: New proposed field for project that a file came from

kate.stewart@...
 

Thanks Kim,

    Will add it into the agenda to discuss tomorrow on the SPEC section.

    If anyone feels strongly about this field, and can't attend the call,  please send email to the list so we have your input.

Thanks, Kate


--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Kim Weins <kim.weins@...> wrote:

From: Kim Weins <kim.weins@...>
Subject: New proposed field for project that a file came from
To: spdx@...
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 6:18 PM


I would like to propose a  new field in the file section.  The field would be used to identify the OSS component/package that a file originated from.  This is important since many packages will bundle other packages.  Knowing the license is important, but if you need to do any research on the file, knowing the component is even more important.

I am proposing this would be an Optional field.

5.6
OSS Project  
5.6.1 Purpose: Identify the name of the open source package or project where this file originated.
5.6.2 Intent: By providing the open source package, the reader can better identify the source and use it to do further research if needed.
5.6.3 Cardinality: Optional, single instance
5.6.4 Tag: "Project"
5.6.5 RDF: /RDF/SPDXDoc/Describes/File/Project
5.6.6 Data Format: Freeform text string
5.6.7 Example: Project: jUnit

Kim

Kim Weins | Senior Vice President, Marketing
kim.weins@...
Follow me on Twitter @KimAtOpenLogic

650 279 0410 | cell
www.openlogic.com
Follow OpenLogic on Twitter @OpenLogic

OpenLogic, Inc.
Headquarters, Broomfield, Colorado





-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx


Re: SPDX Agenda/Minutes

kate.stewart@...
 

Hi Kim, Daniel,
Use case I'm worried about is how do we say what MUST be recognized when all the licenses are on the web. What happens when we don't have a stable base set of "must recognize" to conform.

If we make everything on the web, then the use case of including in the spdx file, the full text of ALL licenses discovered (even if they are ones that have a short form) - will conform to the specification.
Comparisons between analysis of the same package will become "interesting".

Consider package "1" has licenses A, B, C, D in it. A, B, are on the web site, C, D aren't. One analysis tool produces a file with short form of A & B in the spec, C & D included verbatim. Another analysis tool produces a file with A, B, C, & D included verbatim. Both can be said to be SPDX 1.0, but if you compare both to each other, you may not draw the conclusion that they are talking about the same package.

On the other hand, I do understand the concern over not rev'ing the spec too often to conform to license changes.

What do people think about the following for 1.0?

There is a base set of licenses, that MUST be recognized and included as short forms, to conform, and they are captured in Appendix I of the SPEC, as well as being on the web site. This gives the potential for creating a spec which is all inclusive - full text of licenses recognized as short forms, which others on the list have indicated a need for. We include language in the spec, saying these are the ones that MUST be recognized, but others on the website CAN be recognized as well. When there is critical mass of changes to rev the spec to 2.0; the set that is on the web site at that time, becomes the MUST be recognized, and additions after that are CAN be recognized. This avoids the point revision churn for licenses that John's afraid of, allows an enforcement of a minimum set, and give a path to add new licenses as they are nominated into the "active set".

Thoughts?

Kate

--- On Wed, 9/8/10, Kim Weins <kim.weins@...> wrote:

From: Kim Weins <kim.weins@...>
Subject: Re: SPDX Agenda/Minutes
To: "dmg" <dmg@...>, "Philip Odence" <podence@...>
Cc: "spdx@..." <spdx@...>
Date: Wednesday, September 8, 2010, 6:05 PM
I also agree that we should decouple
spec from licenses.  We need a way to
add licenses without having to rev the spec. 
Otherwise we will get lots of
spec revisions or very few license updates.

I know there has been some concern that if the list of
licenses is not
"fixed" with the spec version, you won't know what list of
licenses you need
to be able to "understand" when you get an SPDX file based
on a particular
version of the spec. I'd like to dig into this use case
more, since it seems
to me that any tooling or even manual review processes can
be designed to
just pull the latest and greatest version of licenses from
the website.

The only issue is that you may get an SPDX file that has
something marked as
an "Other" license that is now in the  standard
license repo.  That
shouldn't really be a problem, since all the "Other"
licenses will have full
license text in the SPDX file.

Here's an example:

Company A creates SPDX on 1/1/2011 using latest set of
standard licenses at
that point.  They identify:
File A has Standard License A
File B has Standard License B
File C has Other License C
File D has Other License D

On 2/1/2011, License C is added to standard license repo

Company B reviews SPDX on 3/1/2011
All of the info is still valid -- since License C and D are
in the SPDX
file.  Company B could choose to update the SPDX file
as:
File A has Standard License A
File B has Standard License B
File C now has STANDARD License C
File D has Other License D


Am I missing something here?

Kim








On Wed 9/8/10 12:48 PM, "dmg" <dmg@...>
wrote:

From the minutes:

Our implicit path had tied a fixed license list of
licenses to the
spec rev, but JohnE put forth an impassioned argument
as to why they
should be decouples...

I throw my support behind JohnE proposal. It addresses
many of the
issues I have discussed before.

--dmg

(hopefully I can make wake up in time for the meeting,
but it is tough
to only have 5 hrs of sleep :)



On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Philip Odence
<podence@...>
wrote:
Per discussion late meeting, agendas will be going
out in bodies of emails
and minutes will go out as links to archive at
spdx.org.
I'll strive to get minutes out a week in advance,
though I'm behind this
time. Here's where they are posted (note that Kate
is still editing, so they
won't be final until tonight) http://www.spdx.org/wiki/minutes-26aug2010
Meeting Time: Sept 9, 8am PDT / 10 am CDT / 11am
EDT / 16:00 GMT

Conf call dial-in:
NOTE: THIS NUMBER IS DIFFERENT FROM PAST NUMBERS
AND WILL BE CHANGING IN THE
FUTURE.
Conference code:  7812589502
Toll-free dial-in number (U.S. and
Canada):  (877) 435-0230
International dial-in number: (253) 336-6732
For those dialing in from other regions, a list of
toll free numbers can be
found: https://www.intercallonline.com/portlets/scheduling/viewNumbers/viewNu
mber.do?ownerNumber=6053870&audioType=RP&viewGa=false&ga=OFF
Web:
Note, we will be using a different URL for each
meeting for purposes of
taking attendance. When you login please include
your full name and company
name, so I can just copy/pate into minutes. THX.
http://blackducksoftware.na6.acrobat.com/spdx9sept10/

Administrative Agenda

Attendance
Approval of minutes
Outreach and evangelism:

Common Messaging/Presentation ­ PhilO

Industry Venues ­ PhilR

Website ­ PhilO/Martin

Roll Out Plans - KimW/JohnE


Action Items
Note: Drafting related action items are embedded
in
the Wiki. http://www.spdx.org/wiki/spdx/specification

€ PhilO/Martin - Update on participation page
where to join (suggestion was
to put link in text, not just at top, consider "I
want to use the spec, vs.
I want to contribute to the spec" in navigation
section.
€ Kate- Transfer document (.pdf) back to WIKI.
€ PhilO- Update standard presentation with
LinuxCon2010 input
€ Kate- Clean up the sharing analysis to what is
accurate.
€ Kate- Publish the current version number of
the specification in brackets
behind reference
€ Kim/PhilO- Add and element of 'What's in this
for me?" to presentation
€ JeffL (w/Bill/Gary- Update zlib based on new
specification
€ All- Look for new examples to add to site.
€ PhilK- Explore possibility of LF hosting
source for SPDX tools.
€ Gary- Explore other possible hosting options
€ PhilO- Start making minutes available via
link.
€ BillS- Start up RDF sub-group. Solicite
members.

Technical Agenda

SPEC - current status and open areas - Kate
RDF focus group - current status - Bill
Tools - update from Gary, and others.


L. Philip Odence
Vice President of Business Development
Black Duck Software, inc.
265 Winter Street, Waltham, MA 02451
Phone: 781.810.1819, Mobile: 781.258.9502
podence@...
http://www.blackducksoftware.com
http://twitter.com/podence
http://www.linkedin.com/in/podence
http://www.networkworld.com/community/odence (my blog)

_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx


Kim Weins | Senior Vice President, Marketing
kim.weins@...
Follow me on Twitter @KimAtOpenLogic

650 279 0410 | cell
www.openlogic.com
Follow OpenLogic on Twitter @OpenLogic

OpenLogic, Inc.
Headquarters, Broomfield, Colorado





_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx


Re: Decouple license list from the spec

Michael J Herzog <mjherzog@...>
 

+2 for decoupling the spec from the licenses. We need to be able to update the spec and the license list on different cycles. We should also anticipate that many orgs may want to keep a local copy of the SPDX license list.

Regards, Michael

Michael J. Herzog
+1 650 380 0680 | mjherzog_at_nexB.com
nexB [Open by Design] http://www.nexb.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail (including attachments) may contain information that is proprietary or confidential. If you are not the intended recipient or a person responsible for its delivery to the intended recipient, do not copy or distribute it. Please permanently delete the e-mail and any attachments, and notify us immediately at (650) 380-0680.

On 9/8/2010 4:05 PM, Kim Weins wrote:
I also agree that we should decouple spec from licenses. We need a way to
add licenses without having to rev the spec. Otherwise we will get lots of
spec revisions or very few license updates.

I know there has been some concern that if the list of licenses is not
"fixed" with the spec version, you won't know what list of licenses you need
to be able to "understand" when you get an SPDX file based on a particular
version of the spec. I'd like to dig into this use case more, since it seems
to me that any tooling or even manual review processes can be designed to
just pull the latest and greatest version of licenses from the website.

The only issue is that you may get an SPDX file that has something marked as
an "Other" license that is now in the standard license repo. That
shouldn't really be a problem, since all the "Other" licenses will have full
license text in the SPDX file.

Here's an example:

Company A creates SPDX on 1/1/2011 using latest set of standard licenses at
that point. They identify:
File A has Standard License A
File B has Standard License B
File C has Other License C
File D has Other License D

On 2/1/2011, License C is added to standard license repo

Company B reviews SPDX on 3/1/2011
All of the info is still valid -- since License C and D are in the SPDX
file. Company B could choose to update the SPDX file as:
File A has Standard License A
File B has Standard License B
File C now has STANDARD License C
File D has Other License D


Am I missing something here?

Kim


On Wed 9/8/10 12:48 PM, "dmg"<dmg@...> wrote:
From the minutes:

Our implicit path had tied a fixed license list of licenses to the
spec rev, but JohnE put forth an impassioned argument as to why they
should be decouples...

I throw my support behind JohnE proposal. It addresses many of the
issues I have discussed before.

--dmg

(hopefully I can make wake up in time for the meeting, but it is tough
to only have 5 hrs of sleep :)


New proposed field for project that a file came from

Kim Weins
 


I would like to propose a  new field in the file section.  The field would be used to identify the OSS component/package that a file originated from.  This is important since many packages will bundle other packages.  Knowing the license is important, but if you need to do any research on the file, knowing the component is even more important.

I am proposing this would be an Optional field.

5.6
OSS Project  
5.6.1 Purpose: Identify the name of the open source package or project where this file originated.
5.6.2 Intent: By providing the open source package, the reader can better identify the source and use it to do further research if needed.
5.6.3 Cardinality: Optional, single instance
5.6.4 Tag: "Project"
5.6.5 RDF: /RDF/SPDXDoc/Describes/File/Project
5.6.6 Data Format: Freeform text string
5.6.7 Example: Project: jUnit

Kim

Kim Weins | Senior Vice President, Marketing
kim.weins@...
Follow me on Twitter @KimAtOpenLogic

650 279 0410 | cell
www.openlogic.com
Follow OpenLogic on Twitter @OpenLogic

OpenLogic, Inc.
Headquarters, Broomfield, Colorado





Re: SPDX Agenda/Minutes

Bruno Cornec <Bruno.Cornec@...>
 

Kim Weins said on Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 05:05:46PM -0600:

The only issue is that you may get an SPDX file that has something marked as
an "Other" license that is now in the standard license repo. That
shouldn't really be a problem, since all the "Other" licenses will have full
license text in the SPDX file.
Which in fact solves the point I had during the conf call this week.

If the license is known to spdx, then we can point to a uri/url linked
to spdx.org having it full text. If not, the full text is then embedded,
as long as the license doesn't become official, in which case, it can be
further offloaded from the SPDX file.

Meaning we could have:

File A has Std license: "http://www.spdx.org/license/GPLv2"
File B has Other license embedded "this is the free beer license..."

Thus keeping duplication to a minimum.
Bruno.
--
Open Source & Linux Profession Lead EMEA / http://opensource.hp.com
HP/Intel/Red Hat Open Source Solutions Initiative / http://www.hpintelco.net
http://www.HyPer-Linux.org http://mondorescue.org http://project-builder.org
La musique ancienne? http://www.musique-ancienne.org http://www.medieval.org


Re: SPDX Agenda/Minutes

Kim Weins
 

I also agree that we should decouple spec from licenses. We need a way to
add licenses without having to rev the spec. Otherwise we will get lots of
spec revisions or very few license updates.

I know there has been some concern that if the list of licenses is not
"fixed" with the spec version, you won't know what list of licenses you need
to be able to "understand" when you get an SPDX file based on a particular
version of the spec. I'd like to dig into this use case more, since it seems
to me that any tooling or even manual review processes can be designed to
just pull the latest and greatest version of licenses from the website.

The only issue is that you may get an SPDX file that has something marked as
an "Other" license that is now in the standard license repo. That
shouldn't really be a problem, since all the "Other" licenses will have full
license text in the SPDX file.

Here's an example:

Company A creates SPDX on 1/1/2011 using latest set of standard licenses at
that point. They identify:
File A has Standard License A
File B has Standard License B
File C has Other License C
File D has Other License D

On 2/1/2011, License C is added to standard license repo

Company B reviews SPDX on 3/1/2011
All of the info is still valid -- since License C and D are in the SPDX
file. Company B could choose to update the SPDX file as:
File A has Standard License A
File B has Standard License B
File C now has STANDARD License C
File D has Other License D


Am I missing something here?

Kim








On Wed 9/8/10 12:48 PM, "dmg" <dmg@...> wrote:

From the minutes:

Our implicit path had tied a fixed license list of licenses to the
spec rev, but JohnE put forth an impassioned argument as to why they
should be decouples...

I throw my support behind JohnE proposal. It addresses many of the
issues I have discussed before.

--dmg

(hopefully I can make wake up in time for the meeting, but it is tough
to only have 5 hrs of sleep :)



On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Philip Odence
<podence@...> wrote:
Per discussion late meeting, agendas will be going out in bodies of emails
and minutes will go out as links to archive at spdx.org.
I'll strive to get minutes out a week in advance, though I'm behind this
time. Here's where they are posted (note that Kate is still editing, so they
won't be final until tonight) http://www.spdx.org/wiki/minutes-26aug2010
Meeting Time: Sept 9, 8am PDT / 10 am CDT / 11am EDT / 16:00 GMT

Conf call dial-in:
NOTE: THIS NUMBER IS DIFFERENT FROM PAST NUMBERS AND WILL BE CHANGING IN THE
FUTURE.
Conference code:  7812589502
Toll-free dial-in number (U.S. and Canada):  (877) 435-0230
International dial-in number: (253) 336-6732
For those dialing in from other regions, a list of toll free numbers can be
found: https://www.intercallonline.com/portlets/scheduling/viewNumbers/viewNu
mber.do?ownerNumber=6053870&audioType=RP&viewGa=false&ga=OFF
Web:
Note, we will be using a different URL for each meeting for purposes of
taking attendance. When you login please include your full name and company
name, so I can just copy/pate into minutes. THX.
http://blackducksoftware.na6.acrobat.com/spdx9sept10/

Administrative Agenda

Attendance
Approval of minutes
Outreach and evangelism:

Common Messaging/Presentation ­ PhilO

Industry Venues ­ PhilR

Website ­ PhilO/Martin

Roll Out Plans - KimW/JohnE


Action Items
Note: Drafting related action items are embedded in
the Wiki. http://www.spdx.org/wiki/spdx/specification

€ PhilO/Martin - Update on participation page where to join (suggestion was
to put link in text, not just at top, consider "I want to use the spec, vs.
I want to contribute to the spec" in navigation section.
€ Kate- Transfer document (.pdf) back to WIKI.
€ PhilO- Update standard presentation with LinuxCon2010 input
€ Kate- Clean up the sharing analysis to what is accurate.
€ Kate- Publish the current version number of the specification in brackets
behind reference
€ Kim/PhilO- Add and element of 'What's in this for me?" to presentation
€ JeffL (w/Bill/Gary- Update zlib based on new specification
€ All- Look for new examples to add to site.
€ PhilK- Explore possibility of LF hosting source for SPDX tools.
€ Gary- Explore other possible hosting options
€ PhilO- Start making minutes available via link.
€ BillS- Start up RDF sub-group. Solicite members.

Technical Agenda

SPEC - current status and open areas - Kate
RDF focus group - current status - Bill
Tools - update from Gary, and others.


L. Philip Odence
Vice President of Business Development
Black Duck Software, inc.
265 Winter Street, Waltham, MA 02451
Phone: 781.810.1819, Mobile: 781.258.9502
podence@...
http://www.blackducksoftware.com
http://twitter.com/podence
http://www.linkedin.com/in/podence
http://www.networkworld.com/community/odence (my blog)

_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx


Kim Weins | Senior Vice President, Marketing
kim.weins@...
Follow me on Twitter @KimAtOpenLogic

650 279 0410 | cell
www.openlogic.com
Follow OpenLogic on Twitter @OpenLogic

OpenLogic, Inc.
Headquarters, Broomfield, Colorado


Re: SPDX Agenda/Minutes

dmg
 

From the minutes:

Our implicit path had tied a fixed license list of licenses to the
spec rev, but JohnE put forth an impassioned argument as to why they
should be decouples...

I throw my support behind JohnE proposal. It addresses many of the
issues I have discussed before.

--dmg

(hopefully I can make wake up in time for the meeting, but it is tough
to only have 5 hrs of sleep :)



On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Philip Odence
<podence@...> wrote:
Per discussion late meeting, agendas will be going out in bodies of emails
and minutes will go out as links to archive at spdx.org.
I'll strive to get minutes out a week in advance, though I'm behind this
time. Here's where they are posted (note that Kate is still editing, so they
won't be final until tonight) http://www.spdx.org/wiki/minutes-26aug2010
Meeting Time: Sept 9, 8am PDT / 10 am CDT / 11am EDT / 16:00 GMT

Conf call dial-in:
NOTE: THIS NUMBER IS DIFFERENT FROM PAST NUMBERS AND WILL BE CHANGING IN THE
FUTURE.
Conference code:  7812589502
Toll-free dial-in number (U.S. and Canada):  (877) 435-0230
International dial-in number: (253) 336-6732
For those dialing in from other regions, a list of toll free numbers can be
found: https://www.intercallonline.com/portlets/scheduling/viewNumbers/viewNumber.do?ownerNumber=6053870&audioType=RP&viewGa=false&ga=OFF
Web:
Note, we will be using a different URL for each meeting for purposes of
taking attendance. When you login please include your full name and company
name, so I can just copy/pate into minutes. THX.
http://blackducksoftware.na6.acrobat.com/spdx9sept10/

Administrative Agenda

Attendance
Approval of minutes
Outreach and evangelism:

Common Messaging/Presentation – PhilO

Industry Venues – PhilR

Website – PhilO/Martin

Roll Out Plans - KimW/JohnE


Action Items
Note: Drafting related action items are embedded in
the Wiki. http://www.spdx.org/wiki/spdx/specification

• PhilO/Martin - Update on participation page where to join (suggestion was
to put link in text, not just at top, consider "I want to use the spec, vs.
I want to contribute to the spec" in navigation section.
• Kate- Transfer document (.pdf) back to WIKI.
• PhilO- Update standard presentation with LinuxCon2010 input
• Kate- Clean up the sharing analysis to what is accurate.
• Kate- Publish the current version number of the specification in brackets
behind reference
• Kim/PhilO- Add and element of 'What's in this for me?" to presentation
• JeffL (w/Bill/Gary- Update zlib based on new specification
• All- Look for new examples to add to site.
• PhilK- Explore possibility of LF hosting source for SPDX tools.
• Gary- Explore other possible hosting options
• PhilO- Start making minutes available via link.
• BillS- Start up RDF sub-group. Solicite members.

Technical Agenda

SPEC - current status and open areas - Kate
RDF focus group - current status - Bill
Tools - update from Gary, and others.


L. Philip Odence
Vice President of Business Development
Black Duck Software, inc.
265 Winter Street, Waltham, MA 02451
Phone: 781.810.1819, Mobile: 781.258.9502
podence@...
http://www.blackducksoftware.com
http://twitter.com/podence
http://www.linkedin.com/in/podence
http://www.networkworld.com/community/odence (my blog)

_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx



--
--dmg

---
Daniel M. German
http://turingmachine.org


SPDX Agenda/Minutes

Philip Odence
 

Per discussion late meeting, agendas will be going out in bodies of emails and minutes will go out as links to archive at spdx.org.
I'll strive to get minutes out a week in advance, though I'm behind this time. Here's where they are posted (note that Kate is still editing, so they won't be final until tonight) http://www.spdx.org/wiki/minutes-26aug2010

Meeting Time: Sept 9, 8am PDT / 10 am CDT / 11am EDT / 16:00 GMT

Conf call dial-in:
NOTE: THIS NUMBER IS DIFFERENT FROM PAST NUMBERS AND WILL BE CHANGING IN THE FUTURE.
Conference code:  7812589502
Toll-free dial-in number (U.S. and Canada):  (877) 435-0230
International dial-in number: (253) 336-6732
For those dialing in from other regions, a list of toll free numbers can be found: https://www.intercallonline.com/portlets/scheduling/viewNumbers/viewNumber.do?ownerNumber=6053870&audioType=RP&viewGa=false&ga=OFF
Web:
Note, we will be using a different URL for each meeting for purposes of taking attendance. When you login please include your full name and company name, so I can just copy/pate into minutes. THX.
Attendance
Approval of minutes
Outreach and evangelism:
Common Messaging/Presentation – PhilO
Industry Venues – PhilR
Website – PhilO/Martin
Roll Out Plans - KimW/JohnE
 
Action Items
Note: Drafting related action items are embedded in the Wiki. http://www.spdx.org/wiki/spdx/specification
• PhilO/Martin - Update on participation page where to join (suggestion was to put link in text, not just at top, consider "I want to use the spec, vs. I want to contribute to the spec" in navigation section.
• Kate- Transfer document (.pdf) back to WIKI.
• PhilO- Update standard presentation with LinuxCon2010 input
• Kate- Clean up the sharing analysis to what is accurate.
• Kate- Publish the current version number of the specification in brackets behind reference
• Kim/PhilO- Add and element of 'What's in this for me?" to presentation
• JeffL (w/Bill/Gary- Update zlib based on new specification
• All- Look for new examples to add to site.
• PhilK- Explore possibility of LF hosting source for SPDX tools.
• Gary- Explore other possible hosting options
• PhilO- Start making minutes available via link.
• BillS- Start up RDF sub-group. Solicite members.


Technical Agenda
SPEC - current status and open areas - Kate
RDF focus group - current status - Bill
Tools - update from Gary, and others.



L. Philip Odence
Vice President of Business Development
Black Duck Software, inc.
265 Winter Street, Waltham, MA 02451
Phone: 781.810.1819, Mobile: 781.258.9502


Re: Issue tracking

Martin Michlmayr
 

The Linux Foundation has a Bugzilla instance that we should be able to
use.

* Peter Williams <peter.williams@...> [2010-09-07 16:25]:

Now that the technical sub-group has initiated its work i think it would
be worth having a issue tracking system. This would allow us to
reliably track issues with the spec and to make sure nothing falls
through the cracks.

Peter Williams
<http://openlogic.com>
_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx
--
Martin Michlmayr
Open Source Program Office, Hewlett-Packard


Issue tracking

Peter Williams <peter.williams@...>
 

Now that the technical sub-group has initiated its work i think it would be worth having a issue tracking system. This would allow us to reliably track issues with the spec and to make sure nothing falls through the cracks.

Peter Williams
<http://openlogic.com>


Re: SPDX RDF 'sub-group' meeting Tues Sept 7 invitation details

Bruno Cornec <Bruno.Cornec@...>
 

Hello,

I may be able to attend the last half-hour of the talk, if my previous
conf call with my partner doesn't extend to much :-(.

Bruno.

kate.stewart@... said on Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 10:10:20PM -0700:

Hi Bill,
    I can attend, and want to be considered part of the working group.

Thanks, Kate

--- On Thu, 9/2/10, Bill Schineller <bschineller@...> wrote:

From: Bill Schineller <bschineller@...>
Subject: SPDX RDF 'sub-group' meeting Tues Sept 7 invitation details
To: "Gary SourceAuditor" <gary@...>, "peter.williams@..." <peter.williams@...>, "Jeff@..." <Jeff@...>, "Bruno.Cornec@..." <Bruno.Cornec@...>, "spdx@..." <spdx@...>
Date: Thursday, September 2, 2010, 3:21 PM



SPDX RDF 'sub-group' meeting Tues Sept 7 invitation details
Anyone is welcome; Gary, Jeff, Peter have accepted.

Details below.



SDPX RDF Sub-group Mtg 1

Tuesday Sept 7, 11AM eastern time



Toll-free dial-in number (U.S. and Canada): (877) 435-0230

International dial-in number: (253) 336-6732

Conference code: 7833942033



URL:  http://blackducksoftware.na6.acrobat.com/r39125695/





On 9/1/10 4:44 PM, "Gary O'Neall" <gary@...> wrote:



Tuesday 11AM eastern (8AM pacific) works for me.



Gary





-----Original Message-----

From: Bill Schineller [mailto:bschineller@...]

Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 7:09 AM

To: peter.williams@...; Jeff@...; Gary SourceAuditor;

Bruno.Cornec@...; spdx@...

Subject: shout out re: SPDX RDF 'sub-group'



SPDX colleagues:

   As per the last con-call, here's a shout out to those who wish to

collaborate outside of the current bi-weekly calls to focus on the details

of the RDF representation of an SPDX document.



   I've called out individually



peter.williams AT openlogic.com

Jeff AT palamida.com

gary AT sourceauditor.com

Bruno.Cornec AT hp.com



  who I remember commenting on RDF specifics, and thus may form a 'quorum'

to get started, but anyone else who would like to be on this sub-group

please let me know.



  Would you like to participate in a separate concall - I'm proposing

Tuesday Sept 7 at 11am Boston time?  (same time as the bi-weekly calls, to

permit possibility of spanning CA-MA-Europe)





Sampling of issues to tackle:

  working examples  / tools

    Jeff promised an update?

    Gary's github repo for 'prettyprinter' github.com/goneall

  validation

      use of ontology to check integrity constraints ?

  extensibility / relationship to DOAP

  namespace rules /   URI generation conventions

  permanent URLs for licenses RDF (PURL)

  license RDF (use rdfa ??)



  Please respond on your availability and interest - I'd like to have a

'quorum' on our first call, and from there work out how best to collaborate.



Thanks,

 Bill



Bill Schineller

Knowledge Base Manager

Black Duck Software Inc.

T: +1.781.810.1829

F: +1.781.891.5145

E: bschineller@...

http://www.blackducksoftware.com













Bill Schineller

Knowledge Base Manager

Black Duck Software Inc.

T: +1.781.810.1829

F: +1.781.891.5145

E: bschineller@...

http://www.blackducksoftware.com






-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx
--
Open Source & Linux Profession Lead EMEA / http://opensource.hp.com
HP/Intel/Red Hat Open Source Solutions Initiative / http://www.hpintelco.net
http://www.HyPer-Linux.org http://mondorescue.org http://project-builder.org
La musique ancienne? http://www.musique-ancienne.org http://www.medieval.org


Re: anybody has been successful at using Ninka?

Armijn Hemel <armijn@...>
 

hi!

Is anybody being successful at building and using ninka? So far I have
not heard from anybody (neither good or bad news).
It was not entirely trivial to get it working: the documentation and the
actual names of files and patches are not in sync, so it cost me about
10 minutes to get everything working (I will send more detailed feedback
after I have had some sleep) but it works now. The output is of course
quite terse, but at least it's something :-)

$ ./ninka.pl ./ninka.pl
./ninka.pl;AGPLv3+;,;2

$ ./ninka.pl /tmp/blaat/gettext-0.15/gettext-tools/src/write-qt.h
/tmp/blaat/gettext-0.15/gettext-tools/src/write-qt.h;GPLv2+;,;1

armijn

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
armijn@... || http://www.gpl-violations.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


Re: SPDX RDF 'sub-group' meeting Tues Sept 7 invitation details

kate.stewart@...
 

Hi Bill,
    I can attend, and want to be considered part of the working group.

Thanks, Kate


--- On Thu, 9/2/10, Bill Schineller <bschineller@...> wrote:

From: Bill Schineller <bschineller@...>
Subject: SPDX RDF 'sub-group' meeting Tues Sept 7 invitation details
To: "Gary SourceAuditor" <gary@...>, "peter.williams@..." <peter.williams@...>, "Jeff@..." <Jeff@...>, "Bruno.Cornec@..." <Bruno.Cornec@...>, "spdx@..." <spdx@...>
Date: Thursday, September 2, 2010, 3:21 PM

Anyone is welcome; Gary, Jeff, Peter have accepted.
Details below.

SDPX RDF Sub-group Mtg 1
Tuesday Sept 7, 11AM eastern time

Toll-free dial-in number (U.S. and Canada): (877) 435-0230
International dial-in number: (253) 336-6732
Conference code: 7833942033

URL:  
http://blackducksoftware.na6.acrobat.com/r39125695/


On 9/1/10 4:44 PM, "Gary O'Neall" <gary@...> wrote:

Tuesday 11AM eastern (8AM pacific) works for me.

Gary


-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Schineller [mailto:bschineller@...]
Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 7:09 AM
To: peter.williams@...; Jeff@...; Gary SourceAuditor;
Bruno.Cornec@...; spdx@...
Subject: shout out re: SPDX RDF 'sub-group'

SPDX colleagues:
   As per the last con-call, here's a shout out to those who wish to
collaborate outside of the current bi-weekly calls to focus on the details
of the RDF representation of an SPDX document.

   I've called out individually

peter.williams AT openlogic.com
Jeff AT palamida.com
gary AT sourceauditor.com
Bruno.Cornec AT hp.com

  who I remember commenting on RDF specifics, and thus may form a 'quorum'
to get started, but anyone else who would like to be on this sub-group
please let me know.

  Would you like to participate in a separate concall - I'm proposing
Tuesday Sept 7 at 11am Boston time?  (same time as the bi-weekly calls, to
permit possibility of spanning CA-MA-Europe)


Sampling of issues to tackle:
  working examples  / tools
    Jeff promised an update?
    Gary's github repo for 'prettyprinter' github.com/goneall
  validation
      use of ontology to check integrity constraints ?
  extensibility / relationship to DOAP
  namespace rules /   URI generation conventions
  permanent URLs for licenses RDF (PURL)
  license RDF (use rdfa ??)

  Please respond on your availability and interest - I'd like to have a
'quorum' on our first call, and from there work out how best to collaborate.

Thanks,
 Bill

Bill Schineller
Knowledge Base Manager
Black Duck Software Inc.
T: +1.781.810.1829
F: +1.781.891.5145
E: bschineller@...
http://www.blackducksoftware.com






Bill Schineller
Knowledge Base Manager
Black Duck Software Inc.
T: +1.781.810.1829
F: +1.781.891.5145
E: bschineller@...
http://www.blackducksoftware.com


-----Inline Attachment Follows-----

_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx


anybody has been successful at using Ninka?

dmg
 

hi everybody,

Is anybody being successful at building and using ninka? So far I have
not heard from anybody (neither good or bad news).

Based on feedback we are planning to make a wider release.

thanks again!

--dmg



--
Daniel M. German
http://turingmachine.org/
http://silvernegative.com/
dmg (at) uvic (dot) ca
replace (at) with @ and (dot) with .


SPDX RDF 'sub-group' meeting Tues Sept 7 invitation details

Bill Schineller
 

Anyone is welcome; Gary, Jeff, Peter have accepted.
Details below.

SDPX RDF Sub-group Mtg 1
Tuesday Sept 7, 11AM eastern time

Toll-free dial-in number (U.S. and Canada): (877) 435-0230
International dial-in number: (253) 336-6732
Conference code: 7833942033

URL:  
http://blackducksoftware.na6.acrobat.com/r39125695/


On 9/1/10 4:44 PM, "Gary O'Neall" <gary@...> wrote:

Tuesday 11AM eastern (8AM pacific) works for me.

Gary


-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Schineller [mailto:bschineller@...]
Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 7:09 AM
To: peter.williams@...; Jeff@...; Gary SourceAuditor;
Bruno.Cornec@...; spdx@...
Subject: shout out re: SPDX RDF 'sub-group'

SPDX colleagues:
   As per the last con-call, here's a shout out to those who wish to
collaborate outside of the current bi-weekly calls to focus on the details
of the RDF representation of an SPDX document.

   I've called out individually

peter.williams AT openlogic.com
Jeff AT palamida.com
gary AT sourceauditor.com
Bruno.Cornec AT hp.com

  who I remember commenting on RDF specifics, and thus may form a 'quorum'
to get started, but anyone else who would like to be on this sub-group
please let me know.

  Would you like to participate in a separate concall - I'm proposing
Tuesday Sept 7 at 11am Boston time?  (same time as the bi-weekly calls, to
permit possibility of spanning CA-MA-Europe)


Sampling of issues to tackle:
  working examples  / tools
    Jeff promised an update?
    Gary's github repo for 'prettyprinter' github.com/goneall
  validation
      use of ontology to check integrity constraints ?
  extensibility / relationship to DOAP
  namespace rules /   URI generation conventions
  permanent URLs for licenses RDF (PURL)
  license RDF (use rdfa ??)

  Please respond on your availability and interest - I'd like to have a
'quorum' on our first call, and from there work out how best to collaborate.

Thanks,
 Bill

Bill Schineller
Knowledge Base Manager
Black Duck Software Inc.
T: +1.781.810.1829
F: +1.781.891.5145
E: bschineller@...
http://www.blackducksoftware.com






Bill Schineller
Knowledge Base Manager
Black Duck Software Inc.
T: +1.781.810.1829
F: +1.781.891.5145
E: bschineller@...
http://www.blackducksoftware.com


Re: shout out re: SPDX RDF 'sub-group'

Gary O'Neall
 

Tuesday 11AM eastern (8AM pacific) works for me.

Gary

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Schineller [mailto:bschineller@...]
Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 7:09 AM
To: peter.williams@...; Jeff@...; Gary SourceAuditor;
Bruno.Cornec@...; spdx@...
Subject: shout out re: SPDX RDF 'sub-group'

SPDX colleagues:
As per the last con-call, here's a shout out to those who wish to
collaborate outside of the current bi-weekly calls to focus on the details
of the RDF representation of an SPDX document.

I've called out individually

peter.williams AT openlogic.com
Jeff AT palamida.com
gary AT sourceauditor.com
Bruno.Cornec AT hp.com

who I remember commenting on RDF specifics, and thus may form a 'quorum'
to get started, but anyone else who would like to be on this sub-group
please let me know.

Would you like to participate in a separate concall - I'm proposing
Tuesday Sept 7 at 11am Boston time? (same time as the bi-weekly calls, to
permit possibility of spanning CA-MA-Europe)


Sampling of issues to tackle:
working examples / tools
Jeff promised an update?
Gary's github repo for 'prettyprinter' github.com/goneall
validation
use of ontology to check integrity constraints ?
extensibility / relationship to DOAP
namespace rules / URI generation conventions
permanent URLs for licenses RDF (PURL)
license RDF (use rdfa ??)

Please respond on your availability and interest - I'd like to have a
'quorum' on our first call, and from there work out how best to collaborate.

Thanks,
Bill

Bill Schineller
Knowledge Base Manager
Black Duck Software Inc.
T: +1.781.810.1829
F: +1.781.891.5145
E: bschineller@...
http://www.blackducksoftware.com


Re: shout out re: SPDX RDF 'sub-group'

Jeff Luszcz
 

This will work for me.

Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Schineller [mailto:bschineller@...]
Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2010 7:09 AM
To: peter.williams@...; Jeff Luszcz; Gary SourceAuditor;
Bruno.Cornec@...; spdx@...
Subject: shout out re: SPDX RDF 'sub-group'

SPDX colleagues:
As per the last con-call, here's a shout out to those who wish to
collaborate outside of the current bi-weekly calls to focus on the details
of the RDF representation of an SPDX document.

I've called out individually

peter.williams AT openlogic.com
Jeff AT palamida.com
gary AT sourceauditor.com
Bruno.Cornec AT hp.com

who I remember commenting on RDF specifics, and thus may form a 'quorum'
to get started, but anyone else who would like to be on this sub-group
please let me know.

Would you like to participate in a separate concall - I'm proposing
Tuesday Sept 7 at 11am Boston time? (same time as the bi-weekly calls, to
permit possibility of spanning CA-MA-Europe)


Sampling of issues to tackle:
working examples / tools
Jeff promised an update?
Gary's github repo for 'prettyprinter' github.com/goneall
validation
use of ontology to check integrity constraints ?
extensibility / relationship to DOAP
namespace rules / URI generation conventions
permanent URLs for licenses RDF (PURL)
license RDF (use rdfa ??)

Please respond on your availability and interest - I'd like to have a
'quorum' on our first call, and from there work out how best to
collaborate.

Thanks,
Bill

Bill Schineller
Knowledge Base Manager
Black Duck Software Inc.
T: +1.781.810.1829
F: +1.781.891.5145
E: bschineller@...
http://www.blackducksoftware.com


shout out re: SPDX RDF 'sub-group'

Bill Schineller
 

SPDX colleagues:
As per the last con-call, here's a shout out to those who wish to
collaborate outside of the current bi-weekly calls to focus on the details
of the RDF representation of an SPDX document.

I've called out individually

peter.williams AT openlogic.com
Jeff AT palamida.com
gary AT sourceauditor.com
Bruno.Cornec AT hp.com

who I remember commenting on RDF specifics, and thus may form a 'quorum'
to get started, but anyone else who would like to be on this sub-group
please let me know.

Would you like to participate in a separate concall - I'm proposing
Tuesday Sept 7 at 11am Boston time? (same time as the bi-weekly calls, to
permit possibility of spanning CA-MA-Europe)


Sampling of issues to tackle:
working examples / tools
Jeff promised an update?
Gary's github repo for 'prettyprinter' github.com/goneall
validation
use of ontology to check integrity constraints ?
extensibility / relationship to DOAP
namespace rules / URI generation conventions
permanent URLs for licenses RDF (PURL)
license RDF (use rdfa ??)

Please respond on your availability and interest - I'd like to have a
'quorum' on our first call, and from there work out how best to collaborate.

Thanks,
Bill

Bill Schineller
Knowledge Base Manager
Black Duck Software Inc.
T: +1.781.810.1829
F: +1.781.891.5145
E: bschineller@...
http://www.blackducksoftware.com


Re: CeCILL licences

kate.stewart@...
 

Bonjour Patrick,

CeCILL licenses have been mentioned before by others as well, so unless someone objects I'll just add them to the next draft with some of the others that have been discussed and advocated as candidates for 1.0 on the maillist.

Thank you for your input.

Merci,
Kate

--- On Mon, 8/30/10, Patrick MOREAU <Patrick.MOREAU@...> wrote:

From: Patrick MOREAU <Patrick.MOREAU@...>
Subject: CeCILL licences
To: "spdx@..." <spdx@...>
Date: Monday, August 30, 2010, 7:53 AM
Bonjour

I work in INRIA since 2009 and I follow all the exchanges
about SPDX specification.

I have read the V1.0 beta draft. This document seems very
complete. I have just one comment.  We would like to
mention also CeCILL licences (http://www.cecill.info/licences.fr.html) that are used,
at least, in France.

I propose:

CeCILL-1.0
1.1. Formal Name: Ce(A)C(nrs)I(NRIA)L(ogiciel)L(ibre) V1
1.2. Official Download URL: http://www.cecill.info/licences.fr.html
1.3. SPDX Template Reference Copy: TBD

CeCILL-2.0
1.1. Formal Name: Ce(A)C(nrs)I(NRIA)L(ogiciel)L(ibre) V2
1.2. Official Download URL: http://www.cecill.info/licences.fr.html
1.3. SPDX Template Reference Copy: TBD

CeCILL-B-1.0
1.1. Formal Name: Ce(A)C(nrs)I(NRIA)L(ogiciel)L(ibre)-B
1.2. Official Download URL: http://www.cecill.info/licences.fr.html
1.3. SPDX Template Reference Copy: TBD

CeCILL-C-1.0
1.1. Formal Name: Ce(A)C(nrs)I(NRIA)L(ogiciel)L(ibre)-C
1.2. Official Download URL: http://www.cecill.info/licences.fr.html
1.3. SPDX Template Reference Copy: TBD

Best regards
Patrick


_________________________________________

Patrick Moreau
INRIA
Technology Transfer and Innovation Department
Software Assets Manager
Domaine de Voluceau - Rocquencourt
B.P. 105 - 78153 Le Chesnay Cedex
Tél: +33 1 39 63 78 40
Mob.: +33 6 77 84 58 15
Fax: +33 1 39 63 51 14
E-mail: patrick.moreau@...



 
_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx


Re: Spdx Digest, Vol 1, Issue 16

Soeren_Rabenstein@...
 

1) I noticed the license list included some of the GPL
exceptions such
as Autoconf and Bison.  My understanding is that the
text for these
exceptions would be the exception itself (not the full
license) and so
there would need to be a way to pair the exception with the
proper GPL
version in such a way that is distinct from dual and
disjunctive
licensing situations.  Otherwise, we would need to
list each GPL version
with each exception as separate and whole licenses.
Text for each exception, should include exception and original licenses.
Provided that we still go with the license text repository, what about something like a "diff"-standard for exceptions and variations of the standard licenses? (i.e. a standardized syntax describing lines to add to / delete from the original license text)

BR
Soeren

=====================================================================================================================================
This email and any attachments to it contain confidential information and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it
is addressed.If you are not the intended recipient or receive it accidentally, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail and delete
the message and any attachments from your computer system, and destroy all hard copies. If any, please be advised that any unauthorized
disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted in reliance on this, is illegal and prohibited. Furthermore, any views
or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not represent those of ASUSTeK. Thank you for your cooperation.
=====================================================================================================================================

1521 - 1540 of 1590