Arthit Suriyawongkul

@goneall @zvr From the TOC above, the pending changes to the model are in the remaining - 4 open PRs (+ 1 open issue) in "2. References" - 1 open...

I'm started to try (6) - the one like this: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2046 to few docs, see: - https://github.com/spdx/spdx-3-model/pull/806 - https://github.com/spdx/spdx-3-model/pull/810 These can be changed upon what we agreed about the URL...

I prefer `https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXX/` (Option 6), only because it is the format used by a [bibtex](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc2046/bibtex/) produced from [IETF themselves](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc2046/) (click on "bibtex" button). But as both `https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfcXXX` (Option 3) and...

2 PRs created to update all RFC links to use `https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfcXXX` format - for spdx-spec https://github.com/spdx/spdx-spec/pull/1107 - for spdx-3-model https://github.com/spdx/spdx-3-model/pull/877

@zvr @goneall does this document best to be inside this spdx-3-model repo or in the spec-parser repo? I can open new PR in spec-parser if it is more preferred (and...

All three additions suggested by @zvr is added: - [x] links (all have to have text, no bare URLs) - [x] standardized formats (we have for RFCs, I don't remember...

Thank you @zvr. I have updated the document, separating it to two files as suggested. Also move them to a new `docs/`, together with few other docs.

I think that works. The translators can review the results live at one of the staging websites for support branches at spdx.github.com/spdx-spec/X.Y.Z-dev, and once everyone are happy, we make a...

> I think scenario 1 can be implemented soon - if others agree. Agree. It will give us opportunities as well to try things out before the release of 3.0.1.

> > At which point in time/what kind of event should we trigger the publication CI? > > I'm not planning on using release branches for releases - just tags...