Hmm, what could we do in SLSA that would make this better in the future?

On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 2:51 PM Brandon Lum <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hmm... i think that perhaps we should snapshot the definitions. I think it
> may be a bit late to rename these variables but at least we can be
> consistent with the definitions since SLSA is one of a few applications of
> the build profile.
> My thought is to have a "patch version" size documentation change to
> change the statement.
>
> FYI @Tom Hennen <[email protected]> from the SLSA side.
>
> "Definitions of "buildType", "configSourceEntrypoint", "configSourceUri",
> "parameters" and "environment" follow those defined in SLSA Provenance
> v0.2 <https://slsa.dev/provenance/v0.2>."
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 8, 2024 at 2:24 PM Nisha Kumar <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi There,
>>
>> SLSA 1.0 has some breaking changes that conflict with some Build Profile
>> terms. Specifically, some provenance terms have been lifted off SLSA 0.2
>> that have now been removed from SLSA 1.0
>> <https://slsa.dev/spec/v1.0/provenance#v10>. I would like to re-align
>> the SPDX 3.0 build profile with SLSA 1.0. Should we restart the build
>> profile meetings for this?
>>
>> ---
>> nisha
>>
>>


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#5703): https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/message/5703
Mute This Topic: https://lists.spdx.org/mt/107795144/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.spdx.org/g/Spdx-tech/unsub [[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Reply via email to