Gary O'Neall
Gary O'Neall
@iamwillbar @kestewart I'm thinking 3.0. There are a large number of issues mixed into this one PR. Resolving all of these will likely take a few tech calls.
@wking Thanks for the offer to split it up. I think the controversial items to be excluded would be the `+` operator changes for licenseRef's and the parenthesis "MUST" requirement....
@iamwillbar - I agree with your analysis and reccomendation above.
Tend to agree - this is a general problem where we use the plural form for all the XML properties when in XML it should be singular.
Since this is a change to XML which is not stable in 2.2, I'm moving this issue to 2.3
@tsteenbe how important is this to be resolved in 2.3? I've got a pretty deep stack of 2.3 work to do before release.
From the SPDX tech call on 10 May 2022: Question on whether this should only be applied to Packages since Package is defined to be a unit of software distributed...
> Any nested type is a pain because it has to be translated to flat tag-value pairs. I was thinking we could have it be a nested type for JSON,...
From our discussion on the [April 2 tech call](https://wiki.spdx.org/view/Technical_Team/Minutes/2019-04-02) with @pombredanne , we agreed that this will require an update to the spec. License-Ref's with namespaces will not have license...
@maddin778 Did you forget to add the # this is a duplicate of?