Skip to content

Conversation

@jkowalleck
Copy link
Member

changes as discussed here: #347 (comment)

@jkowalleck jkowalleck added this to the 1.6 milestone Jan 26, 2024
@jkowalleck jkowalleck requested a review from a team as a code owner January 26, 2024 14:39
Signed-off-by: Jan Kowalleck <jan.kowalleck@gmail.com>
@jkowalleck
Copy link
Member Author

@bhess could I ask you for a review?

@jkowalleck jkowalleck mentioned this pull request Jan 26, 2024
4 tasks
// Defines and characterizes the type of dependency
optional DependencyType type = 3;
// The bom-ref identifiers of the components or services that define a given specification or standard, which are provided or implemented by this dependency object.
repeated string provides = 3;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

provides is a verb. Can we use a bit generic like capabilities to indicate a state and not an action?

Copy link
Member Author

@jkowalleck jkowalleck Jan 26, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

provides is a verb. Can we use a bit generic like capabilities to indicate a state and not an action?

for protobuff, I'd agree. a noun would go with the current naming conventions.

for JSON/XML, ... not certain.

PS: i am open to suggestions for alternative names.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sounds like your suggestion for capabilities @prabhu would be a good fit for what we're doing with CDX 1.7 - specifically architecture and blueprints.

// Defines and characterizes the type of dependency
optional DependencyType type = 3;
// The bom-ref identifiers of the components or services that define a given specification or standard, which are provided or implemented by this dependency object.
repeated string provides = 3;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sounds like your suggestion for capabilities @prabhu would be a good fit for what we're doing with CDX 1.7 - specifically architecture and blueprints.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants