Created nftables-1.0.2#277
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Pascal Minder <p.minder@evtec.ch>
| @@ -0,0 +1,1791 @@ | |||
| ======================================================================================================================== | |||
|
|
|||
| nftables-1.0.2.tar.bz2 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should the name be without the file extension tar.bz2?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes please remove the extensions
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it possible to set the name of the package directly in FOSSology, or has it to be manually altered?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
you do not need to do that, I will take care of it.
| PackageName: nftables-1.0.2.tar.bz2 | ||
| PackageFileName: nftables-1.0.2.tar.bz2 | ||
| SPDXID: SPDXRef-upload450 | ||
| PackageDownloadLocation: NOASSERTION |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this be filled out?
And should we add a ExternalRef
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes please, this will make the SPDX files self contained
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can I change both in FOSSology itself, or do I need to edit the exported files manually?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No you do not need to do that, I can do that. Not to load you with postprocessing. Since you are providing the Readme file.
But if you like you can aslo add the purl in the following field (in the "Conf" menu, please do not forget to press the "submit" button in the bottom of the page):
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I added the purl, but it did add it as ExternalRef. Is this still ok? See below on line 50.
|
A very warm welcome to you @evtecag. Thank you very much for your contribution, I will look into it and provide you feedback. |
OliverFendt
left a comment
OliverFendt
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Excellent contribution @evtecag, especially the CC-BY-SA acknowledgment is very well done. I only have a few comments.
analysed-packages/nftables/version-1.0.2/nftables-1.0.2-OSS-disclosure.txt
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
analysed-packages/nftables/version-1.0.2/nftables-1.0.2-OSS-disclosure.txt
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
analysed-packages/nftables/version-1.0.2/nftables-1.0.2-OSS-disclosure.txt
Show resolved
Hide resolved
analysed-packages/nftables/version-1.0.2/nftables-1.0.2-OSS-disclosure.txt
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My commenty in the OSS-disclosure file are also valid in this file
| FileChecksum: SHA1: 18fa48a7ed581b147776213368ae1aafd82509c2 | ||
| FileChecksum: SHA256: c17bc4fa5b2434c6f283ffcb2312e5bf3c7cdf5787b79505f094d8de734ac53e | ||
| FileChecksum: MD5: d1a78fdd879a263a5e0b42d1fc565e79 | ||
| LicenseConcluded: LicenseRef-License-of-GNU-Licenses |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you alos please check whether you have the comments enabled in the SPDX report.
Additionally it is somehow strange that there is LicenseInfoInFile: NOASSERTION the scanners should have matched a license there. The same applies also in the following files like nftables-1.0.2/src/proto.c etc.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have the following settings for the package in FOSSology:
The shown settings should be the right ones?
Signed-off-by: Pascal Minder <p.minder@evtec.ch>
evtecag
force-pushed
the
nftables-1.0.2
branch
from
c8c6af8 to
a542e67
Compare
|
I think I have changed all the requested points, or do you see another issue I need to fix? Thank you very much for your time and review. |
OliverFendt
left a comment
OliverFendt
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Excellent work @evtecag . Thank you very much. For your contribution
2 participants
We would like to contribute the curated nftables-1.0.2 licence information.
Since it is our first contribution, I highlighted some differences between previous contribution and our uploaded files. Could you give us a hint if we need to add the missing information or if they are not relevant?
Thank you very much for your review.