openchain:specification-questions-and-answers
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Next revision Both sides next revision | ||
|
openchain:specification-questions-and-answers [2018/06/11 03:18] mgisi [What are the Specification Guiding Principles?] |
openchain:specification-questions-and-answers [2018/10/06 16:37] mgisi [Is a third party audit required to declare an Open Source Compliance program to be OpenChain Conforming?] |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
| - | ==== Does a FOSS program need to satisfy all the requirements of the specification to be considered OpenChain Conforming? ==== | + | ==== Does an Open Source Compliance program need to satisfy all the requirements of the specification to be considered OpenChain Conforming? ==== |
| Yes. The specification was designed to provide a core set of requirements to ensure a certain level of program quality has been achieved. In order to ensure there are no significant gaps in an OpenChain conforming program that could lead to poor quality output, a program must satisfy all the requirements to be considered OpenChain conforming. | Yes. The specification was designed to provide a core set of requirements to ensure a certain level of program quality has been achieved. In order to ensure there are no significant gaps in an OpenChain conforming program that could lead to poor quality output, a program must satisfy all the requirements to be considered OpenChain conforming. | ||
| Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
| The Linux Foundation OpenChain working group functions like an open source project by obtaining input from dozens of individuals, companies and organizations that have experiences preparing for and/or exchanging software in the software supply chain. There are no specific requirements for participating. The working group identified 6 main categories of a compliance program and then had contributors identify important tasks and deliverable for each category. The six categories were: | The Linux Foundation OpenChain working group functions like an open source project by obtaining input from dozens of individuals, companies and organizations that have experiences preparing for and/or exchanging software in the software supply chain. There are no specific requirements for participating. The working group identified 6 main categories of a compliance program and then had contributors identify important tasks and deliverable for each category. The six categories were: | ||
| - | - Know Your Free and Open Source (FOSS) Responsibilities [i.e., “Policy and Training”] | + | - Know Your Free and Open Source Responsibilities [i.e., “Policy and Training”] |
| - Assign Responsibility for Achieving Compliance | - Assign Responsibility for Achieving Compliance | ||
| - | - Deliver FOSS Content Documentation and Artifacts | + | - Deliver Open Source Content Documentation and Artifacts |
| - | - Review and approve FOSS content | + | - Review and approve Open Source content |
| - | - Understand FOSS Community Engagement | + | - Understand Open Source Community Engagement |
| - Certify Adherence to OpenChain Requirements | - Certify Adherence to OpenChain Requirements | ||
| A number of reference documents were prepared and used as important sources of input into identifying core requirements of a quality compliance program. Several of those documents include: | A number of reference documents were prepared and used as important sources of input into identifying core requirements of a quality compliance program. Several of those documents include: | ||
| Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
| * The Supplier License Compliance Audit (SLCA) | * The Supplier License Compliance Audit (SLCA) | ||
| - | ====Is a third party audit required to declare a FOSS program to be OpenChain Conforming?==== | + | ====Is a third party audit required to declare an Open Source Compliance program to be OpenChain Conforming?==== |
| - | No. At least not yet. The [[https://wiki.linuxfoundation.org/_media/openchain/openchainspec-1.0.pdf|OpenChain 1.0 specification]] is simply structured to provide a list of requirements where each requirement maintains a set of acceptance criteria (Verification Artifacts). Each requirement is a description of an important quality a Open Source program must maintain. The Verification Artifacts for a requirement represent a list of tangible artifacts that must exist in order for one to determine the specific requirement has been met. Although artifacts must exist, one is not required to make them public. The key goal of the specification is to foster trust around Open Source compliance between two parties exchanging software. Although currently an audit by a third party is not a requirement of the OpenChain specification, a partner or customer may ask for evidence of the Verification Artifacts as a condition for doing business (e.g., under an Non-Disclosure agreement). That is, the obligation to provide evidence of the existence of the artifacts, and the willingness to do so, is determined by the relationship entered into by two parties. It has been discussed that a future version of the specification may provide more specific guidelines on how to obtain third party certification. | + | No. The [[https://wiki.linuxfoundation.org/_media/openchain/openchainspec-1.2.pdf|OpenChain 1.2 specification]] is simply structured to provide a list of requirements where each requirement maintains a set of acceptance criteria (Verification Materials). Each requirement is a description of an important quality a Open Source Compliance program must satisfy. The Verification Materials for a requirement represent a list of tangible artifacts that must exist in order for one to determine the specific requirement has been met. Although artifacts must exist, one is not required to make them public. The key goal of the specification is to foster trust around Open Source compliance between two parties exchanging software. Although currently an audit by a third party is not an available option, a partner or customer may ask for evidence of the Verification Materials as a condition for doing business (e.g., under an Non-Disclosure agreement). That is, the obligation to provide evidence of the existence of the artifacts, and the willingness to do so, is determined by the relationship entered into by two parties. A third party auditing program has been discussed several times but there currently is no formal program yet. If a program existed to support audits by a third party then audited compliance program would be classified as "certified". The self-certification approach allows one to declare their compliance program to be "conforming. |
| - | ====Does the specification describe how to comply with the most popular FOSS licenses?==== | + | ====Does the specification describe how to comply with the most popular Open Source licenses?==== |
| No. The specification does not provide legal guidance. It does require an organization to designate a legal expert who can assist with legal guidance. Furthermore the specification requires that a process exists that ensures the appropriate attention is given to license obligation analysis and and fulfillment. | No. The specification does not provide legal guidance. It does require an organization to designate a legal expert who can assist with legal guidance. Furthermore the specification requires that a process exists that ensures the appropriate attention is given to license obligation analysis and and fulfillment. | ||
openchain/specification-questions-and-answers.txt · Last modified: 2019/11/17 19:12 by mgisi
Page Tools
Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: CC Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International
