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

Add SPDX-License-Identifier to source files #1439

Closed

Conversation

marcusfolkesson
Copy link
Contributor

SPDX License List is a list of (common) open source
licenses that can be referred to by a “short identifier”.
It has several advantages compared to the common "license header texts"
usually found in source files.

Some of the advantages:

  • It is precise; there is no ambiguity due to variations in license header
    text
  • It is language neutral
  • It is easy to machine process
  • It is concise
  • It is simple and can be used without much cost in interpreted
    environments like java Script, etc.
  • An SPDX license identifier is immutable.
  • It provides simple guidance for developers who want to make sure the
    license for their code is respected

See http://spdx.org for further reading.

Signed-off-by: Marcus Folkesson marcus.folkesson@gmail.com

SPDX License List is a list of (common) open source
licenses that can be referred to by a “short identifier”.
It has several advantages compared to the common "license header texts"
usually found in source files.

Some of the advantages:
* It is precise; there is no ambiguity due to variations in license header
  text
* It is language neutral
* It is easy to machine process
* It is concise
* It is simple and can be used without much cost in interpreted
  environments like java Script, etc.
* An SPDX license identifier is immutable.
* It provides simple guidance for developers who want to make sure the
  license for their code is respected

See http://spdx.org for further reading.

Signed-off-by: Marcus Folkesson <marcus.folkesson@gmail.com>
@@ -5,6 +5,8 @@
<!--
Copyright 2014 Colin Walters <walters@verbum.org>

SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.0+
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmm, actually...the man pages should probably be under the docs license. But...let's not try to do that relicensing now.

@cgwalters
Copy link
Member

@rh-atomic-bot r+ ccc7677

@rh-atomic-bot
Copy link

⌛ Testing commit ccc7677 with merge 6bf4b3e...

@cgwalters
Copy link
Member

Thanks!

@rh-atomic-bot
Copy link

☀️ Test successful - status-atomicjenkins
Approved by: cgwalters
Pushing 6bf4b3e to master...

cgwalters added a commit to cgwalters/rpm-ostree that referenced this pull request Feb 18, 2021
It turns out we accidentally added GPL'd code into the Rust
side, which wasn't intentional on my part and I think it's since
been copied around.

Honestly I think half of the problem is the gigantic
"blah blah blah GNU General blah blah" just makes people's eyes
glaze over.  In contrast the `SPDX-License-Identifier` is short
and obvious.

So let's validate that in CI.

This follows a similar change in ostree:
ostreedev/ostree#1439

If we merge this I'll do the C/C++ side too after that.
openshift-merge-robot pushed a commit to coreos/rpm-ostree that referenced this pull request Feb 19, 2021
It turns out we accidentally added GPL'd code into the Rust
side, which wasn't intentional on my part and I think it's since
been copied around.

Honestly I think half of the problem is the gigantic
"blah blah blah GNU General blah blah" just makes people's eyes
glaze over.  In contrast the `SPDX-License-Identifier` is short
and obvious.

So let's validate that in CI.

This follows a similar change in ostree:
ostreedev/ostree#1439

If we merge this I'll do the C/C++ side too after that.
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.

None yet

3 participants