PEP 770: Improving measurability of Python packages with Software Bill-of-Materials

Packaging
41

Thanks all for the comments, I have left the specification as-is.

@pf_moore I added a terminology section for “root SBOM directory”, hopefully that is more clear now about optionality of fields and that most projects won’t have any work to do? See this pull request: PEP 770: Add sections for Users, Projects, and SCA tools in 'How to Teach' by sethmlarson · Pull Request #4222 · python/peps · GitHub

1 Like
42

Also, a separate pull request moving “Selecting a Single SBOM Standard” from Open Issues to Rejected Ideas noting that the current PEP doesn’t preclude a future PEP from selecting a single SBOM standard if one is able to “win” over all the others. Thanks @woodruffw and @steve.dower for contributing to this discussion!

2 Likes