Thanks, Steve. A good point for anyone else who will not be able to attend the call: feel free to email your preferences on the three questions!
-- zvr ________________________________ From: [email protected] <[email protected]> on behalf of Steve Winslow <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2023 15:10 To: [email protected] <[email protected]>; SPDX-legal <[email protected]> Cc: Steve Winslow <[email protected]>; Sean Barnum <[email protected]>; Thomas Steenbergen <[email protected]>; Zavras, Alexios <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [spdx-tech] SPDX special meeting on Properties vs Relationships CC’ing the SPDX legal team list in case anyone from the legal team wants to attend as well. I won’t be able to attend during the suggested times this week (and I’ll be unavailable the next couple of weeks), so here are my quick thoughts on the questions: 3: Strong preference that both should be the same type 1 and 2: Mild preference for properties, mainly for continuity with SPDX 2.3 and prior. But not a strong preference, as long as relationships are not overly complicated and are reasonably straightforward to explain to SPDX data producers and consumers. As a reminder to everyone, the definitions of declaredLicense and concludedLicense that were agreed upon during the 2020 / 2021 discussions on the SPDX 3.0 licensing profile are currently available at: * declaredLicense: https://github.com/spdx/spdx-3-model/blob/main/model/Software/Properties/declaredLicense.md * concludedLicense: https://github.com/spdx/spdx-3-model/blob/main/model/Software/Properties/concludedLicense.md Best, Steve On Jun 14, 2023, at 4:20 AM, Alexios Zavras <[email protected]> wrote: Hi all, During the tech call yesterday, we decided we should have an extra meeting to advance on the topic of modeling the licensing info. The three questions that will drive the discussion are: 1. Do we prefer declaredLicense to be a property or a relationship? 2. Do we prefer concludedLicense to be a property or a relationship? 3. Do we prefer both of the above to be of the same type? I think it was made clear that any answer is possible and we can make things work. This is about how strong our preferences are and reaching compromises... I've put the names of people who expressed interest in participating explicitly (and I don't have David Edelsohn's email), but everyone is welcome to join! In order to determine whether we can find a suitable timeslot this week, I created an online poll: please, if you want to attend, mark your preferences at https://dud-poll.inf.tu-dresden.de/spdx-prop-rels/. All times are in UTC! I'll leave the poll open for 24 hours or so. -- zvr Intel Deutschland GmbH Registered Address: Am Campeon 10, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de<http://www.intel.de/> Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Sharon Heck, Tiffany Doon Silva Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau Registered Office: Munich Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928 Intel Deutschland GmbH Registered Address: Am Campeon 10, 85579 Neubiberg, Germany Tel: +49 89 99 8853-0, www.intel.de <http://www.intel.de> Managing Directors: Christin Eisenschmid, Sharon Heck, Tiffany Doon Silva Chairperson of the Supervisory Board: Nicole Lau Registered Office: Munich Commercial Register: Amtsgericht Muenchen HRB 186928 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#5174): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/message/5174 Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/99523557/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
