We discussed this more in the OE TSC, and it seems more likely that it
will happen. The reasons for this are:

1) SPDX 3 is much better than SPDX 2 (esp. if you are looking for CRA
compliance)
2) The users who have acknowledged that they use SPDX 2 are also the
ones proposing solutions for scripts/mix-in layers
3) The LTS is a long time, and maintaining SPDX 2 for another 4 years
seems like it would be a bad idea
4) We backported SPDX 3 to Scarthgap pretty successfully, so I'm
pretty confident that if SPDX 2 is that important, some will step up
to do some sort of script/mix-in layer solution
  a) If you do this, _please_ share it with the rest of us :)

Thanks,

On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 2:05 AM Richard Purdie
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2026-03-13 at 10:52 -0600, Joshua Watt wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 10:41 AM Daniel Turull
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > > Just to experiment I made a script that converts the SPDX3 from oe-
> > > core to SPDX2.3. I have used assisted AI, using specs for both
> > > SPDX2.3 and SPDX3 and using https://github.com/spdx/tools-python
> > >
> > > I have uploaded it for now into my branch in openembedded-core-
> > > contrib if people wants to take a look.
> > >
> > > If you think is a good idea to have in openembedded-core as a
> > > replacement of the create-spdx2.2.bbclass, I can send it for review
> > > to oe-core. It is around 1700 lines.
> > > https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core-contrib/commit/?h=dturull/spdx-convert&id=4fe27f52a6848825bf51aa24fdcf5ae683b509be
> > >
> > > It can generate both a single SPDX file and a multi file as we have
> > > now with SPDX2.
> > > It passes validation and the single one it works fine in on tools
> > > injecting SPDX2.
> > >
> > > There are instructions how to run in the header of the script.
> > >
> > > I have created also a report that I have also pushed with the
> > > differences with a reference SPDX2 from yocto and a script to
> > > regenerate it.
> > > https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core-contrib/commit/?h=dturull/spdx-convert&id=f9ee3da7f8daba34e9768e3b44e953c09f829735
> > >
> > > It could help to keep the spdx2.2 functionality but use spdx3
> > > generation, while allowing people to start using SPDX 2 generated
> > > from Yocto.
> >
> > Ya, that's great. I'll take a look at it. Obstensibly, this might be
> > even better than SPDX 2.2 in oe-core because it can make a single
> > file, which our SPDX 2.2 code had trouble with (for $REASONS)
>
> I like Daniel's idea a lot and I think we should explore it.
>
> The reason we're even considering this is due to the problems 2.2 poses
> for us such as the multiple files and this could avoid a lot of them.
> I'm interested to see what Joshua finds with that output.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#2309): 
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/message/2309
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/118281203/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-architecture/unsub 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to