Agree with Philippe - more details/background below Gary > -----Original Message----- > From: spdx-tech-boun...@lists.spdx.org [mailto:spdx-tech- > boun...@lists.spdx.org] On Behalf Of Philippe Ombredanne > Sent: Monday, May 26, 2014 4:26 AM > To: Vlad Velici > Cc: spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org > Subject: Re: [GSOC] Go Library SPDX version support > > On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Vlad Velici <vlad.vel...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > 1. Is it worth trying to create an (abstract) model (Go struct) to > store Spdx Documents regarding of their version and have different > mechanisms for each version to parse, write and validate? > > IMHO, not worth. Start with 1.2 with an eye towards what you noticed > as new things in 2.0 (such as multiple packages) but do not worry too > much about 2.0 for now
I would focus on 1.2 for now. Although the high level model is pretty stable, some of the details for SPDX 2.0 is still in development. I'm holding off writing a new Java based model until the spec gets a bit more stable and documented. > > > 2. I see that the describesPackage property of SpdxDocument class > disappears in version 2.0. In version 1.2 it was the way it added a > package to a SpdxDocument but now this seems to be achieved by using > the relationship property. Now, in 1.2 this limited a SpdxDocument to > always have one package (and not more) but this limit is not implied by > the spec for version 2. Does this mean that in version 2 a SpdxDocument > can have none or more packages? > > One or more, yes. This is a major change in 2.0 > > -- > Cordially > Philippe Ombredanne > _______________________________________________ > Spdx-tech mailing list > Spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org > https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-tech _______________________________________________ Spdx-tech mailing list Spdx-tech@lists.spdx.org https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-tech
