Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

being specific on directory structure #33

Open
idunbarh opened this issue Aug 3, 2023 · 3 comments
Open

being specific on directory structure #33

idunbarh opened this issue Aug 3, 2023 · 3 comments

Comments

@idunbarh
Copy link
Contributor

idunbarh commented Aug 3, 2023

Ref https://github.com/ossf/sbom-everywhere/blob/main/reference/sbom_naming.md

  1. Directory Structure:

Store SBOM files in a dedicated directory, separate from the source code. This might be a top-level directory in the repository named something like SBOMs.

I see one of the objectives of this document is to drive common locations and naming conventions to facilitate SBOM discovery. Like #32, I would expect this document to recommend a specific directory name. The current language is ambiguous.

Would the WG be interested in the following language?

Store SBOM files in a dedicated directory, separate from the source code. This should be a top-level directory in the repository named sboms.

@sjn
Copy link

sjn commented Apr 22, 2024

Agreed.

Related, I think there is a case for suggesting a standard system installation directory for SBOMs, so they can be found locally. E.g. /lib/sboms/$packagename.cdx.json.

@ljharb
Copy link
Member

ljharb commented Apr 22, 2024

A path that likely requires sudo would be a very subpar choice, i think.

@sjn
Copy link

sjn commented Apr 22, 2024

Ah, sorry. I'm specifically thinking of the situation after the build step (when an SBOM is produced), namely when the artifacts are installed. In this case I think accompanying SBOM files would be good to have installed in a standard location along with the build artifacts

Apologies for that. I guess a separate ticket is in order then? 🙂

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

No branches or pull requests

3 participants