We've got a lot of historical cruft in our SPDX repo as well.  Coming up
with some criteria for inclusion & removal is overdue.

After we settle the 3.0 template issue,  you up for dedicating part of a
call to sketch out the repository inclusion criteria?  Then we'll do an
assessment/clean up pass.

Thanks,
Kate


On Tue, Jun 29, 2021 at 1:29 PM Thomas Steenbergen <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> Continuing the discussion in today’s SPDX Tech call here on “Should SPDX
> endorse SCA tools?” - so other people in the SPDX community get the
> opportunity to share their opinion.
>
>
>
> Following  Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) Industry Standard, Research,
> Training, and Tools to Improve Cybersecurity Practices
> <https://www.linuxfoundation.org/press-release/linux-foundation-announces-software-bill-of-materials-sbom-industry-standard-research-training-and-tools-to-improve-cybersecurity-practices/>
> announcement, I got the feedback form within my network asking me about the 
> “official”
> SPDX SCA* tool (spdx-sbom-generator
> <https://github.com/spdx/spdx-sbom-generator>) – some project/technical
> question and remarks about the quality of the SBOM it produces.
>
>
>
> I then realized that as spdx-sbom-generator
> <https://github.com/spdx/spdx-sbom-generator> is hosted on spdx GitHub
> org one can see it as an endorsement from SPDX. In OpenChain community, who
> also develops it specification, a deliberate choice was made to not endorse
> any tools as I was told a specification should be tooling neutral to
> facilitate broad adoption and healthy tooling ecosystem supporting the
> specification.
>
>
>
> I think it may be a good idea for SPDX to do the same, as it’s possible to
> validate a SPDX SBOM per the specification but we cannot easily validate if
> SBOM is actually a good representation of reality.
>
> Most build tools are meant to build code and do not to produce an SBOM.
> As a result, SCA tools on the market generally do a best effort approach
> and thereby miss OSS or get OSS license or metadata wrong.
>
>
>
> Let me know what you think.
>
>
>
> * SCA = Software Composition Analysis
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Thomas Steenbergen
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 
>
>


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#4094): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/message/4094
Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/83875398/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/unsub [[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to