You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I should note that making a "release" (0.7.0) with a title "Support SPDX 2.3" but not actually supporting one of the official formats is not great publicity for the SPDX project.
The options were to either release with the rdf caveat, or delay the release for an unknown amount of time as rdf is hard to deal with and the existing code is not in great shape. They were discussed in the weekly public meetings, where it was decided that rdf is less important than json/yaml/xml and less important than tag/value, and supporting rdf can be postponed until major refactoring is done. There is no concrete estimate for when it will be implemented.
Activity
[-]re-implement rdf support[/-][+]rdf support for 2.3[/+]meretp commentedon Nov 21, 2022
#274 is a subtask of this.
zvr commentedon Dec 9, 2022
Any estimate for this?
I should note that making a "release" (0.7.0) with a title "Support SPDX 2.3" but not actually supporting one of the official formats is not great publicity for the SPDX project.
nicoweidner commentedon Dec 9, 2022
The options were to either release with the rdf caveat, or delay the release for an unknown amount of time as rdf is hard to deal with and the existing code is not in great shape. They were discussed in the weekly public meetings, where it was decided that rdf is less important than json/yaml/xml and less important than tag/value, and supporting rdf can be postponed until major refactoring is done. There is no concrete estimate for when it will be implemented.
armintaenzertng commentedon Mar 30, 2023
Full SPDX 2.3 support is now part of the refactored version found on main.