Hi David,
   Gary and I were talking about this at lunch - yes, your use case, which is 
an important one for lowering the barrier for upstream projects to declare 
licenses in a standardized way - represents an 'SPDX Lite' requirement/use case 
that has often come up.

   Let's chat about it while we are all here at Collab.

Bill Schineller
VP Engineering - KnowledgeBase
Black Duck Software 
781-425-4405 
508-308-5921 (cell)
[email protected]







On 3/30/16, 2:18 PM, "[email protected] on behalf of Wheeler, 
David A" <[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]> wrote:

>I'm primarily interested in the use case where software developers *assert* 
>their license(s) in terms of a license expression, and the SPDX file (if any) 
>is *embedded* in the package as a *hand-created* file (created by the 
>developers).
>
>In this use case, I think that many of the "mandatory" tags should actually 
>*NOT* be mandatory. In particular, these are the *only* tags I would use in 
>this use case (filled in with an example):
>    SPDXVersion: SPDX-2.0
>    DataLicense: CC0-1.0
>    PackageName: Foo
>    PackageOriginator: David A. Wheeler
>    PackageHomePage: https://github.com/david-a-wheeler/spdx-tutorial/
>    PackageLicenseDeclared: MIT
>
>This means that many tags identified as mandatory should *NOT* be mandatory in 
>this use case (in my opinion).  For example:
>* the "Created" datetime stamp should NOT be used.  Developers use version 
>control systems to manage that, and any value entered will be unmaintained 
>(and thus WRONG).
>* "DocumentName" - you can see what it is, there's no need for it.
>* "PackageDownloadLocation" - the specific URL for this particular version 
>changes all the time.
>
>I'm not saying these tags are useless - when SPDX is used to exchange the 
>results of external analysis, these tags *are* important.  But I think people 
>this is a different use case, and it should be unsurprising that what's needed 
>is different.
>
>I only noticed this when I tried to write a tutorial trying to explain how to 
>use the SPDX file in this use case.
>
>Anyway, my two cents.
>
>--- David A. Wheeler
>
>_______________________________________________
>Spdx-tech mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-tech
_______________________________________________
Spdx-tech mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-tech

Reply via email to