Dear all,

I would like to second Nisha's request, and also to elaborate on a
few solutions for the first point.


-------------

# 1: File Elements have a 'path' property on them

## Pros:

- Makes it easy for SBOM consumers to locate the file

- Does not require extensive changes to the specification

## Cons:

- Effectively prevents reuse of Elements (one of the key opportunities
  of SPDX 3.0) by making Files specific to their 'containing' Package
  Element.


-------------

# 2: 'path' property is a field on the Contains relationship

## Pros:

- Allows reuse of File Elements between Packages

## Cons:

- Requires adding extra fields to the Relationship Element, which up
  until this point has had only 'relationship' type and 'comment'


-------------

# 3: a new Element is created for mapping between Element IDs and file paths

## Pros:

- Faciliates reuse of Elements

- Only requires one new Relationship type (from Package to itself)

## Cons:

I can't think of any ;)


-------------

Out of these, #2 or #3 would be my favoured options.

Best wishes,

Sebastian

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 06:00:01AM -0700, Nisha Kumar wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The build profile group would like some feedback on some discussion topics
> that came up during our meetings. I was wondering if we could add this to
> today's (Jun 14) agenda:
>
> - A package includes or contains files, which has hashes but does not
> necessary encode any path information.
>
> - Expressing environment variables as a "Map" object.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> nisha
>
>
>
> 
>
>


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#4579): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/message/4579
Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/91748372/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/unsub [[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to