LWN: Comments on "A SPDX case study" http://lwn.net/Articles/568286/ This is a special feed containing comments posted to the individual LWN article titled "A SPDX case study". hourly 2 A SPDX case study http://lwn.net/Articles/568931/rss 2013-09-30T16:05:21+00:00 dps <div class="FormattedComment"> Working for a company that distributes boxes which aggregate OSS and definitely not OSS software the ability to track what licences apply to which bit of which package would be worth a lot.<br> <p> Sometime we either don't have the source code or can't get it under a licence that would allow us to redistribute the source code. Some of the other code is hazardous to mental health or part of our secret sauce (and sometimes both).<br> <p> </div> A SPDX case study http://lwn.net/Articles/568491/rss 2013-09-26T18:48:57+00:00 HIGHGuY <div class="FormattedComment"> Working for another large company that deals with OSS I recognize the problems faced.<br> Our company also has a large database that one uploads source code into for license review and that aids the process of verification and license obligation compliance.<br> <p> For our team, using the tool at first generated a lot of work.<br> Currently we source 2 different Linux distributions and maintaining all of this information throughout regular package updates and other maintenance is quite a burden.<br> That is why we further automated the process for our team, going from 2-3 manweeks of work per release, down to 2-3 mandays of work per release. Further tuning can probably bring this down to 1-2 mandays.<br> <p> For any large company dealing with OSS products, such automation is golden.<br> <p> There are additional benefits to be found in maintaining such a database like providing teams with security alerts or merely forming an internal community around certain packages, promoting reuse and stimulating communication.<br> </div> A SPDX case study http://lwn.net/Articles/568460/rss 2013-09-26T16:50:40+00:00 dvdeug <div class="FormattedComment"> If your supplier sends a SPDX, and you produce a significantly different one, that's a good sign that someone needs to manually go over the package. They may find things that would elude an automatic search.<br> </div>