Change license to Apache 2.0 #547
Conversation
|
LGTM |
|
@metacosm: changing LGTM is restricted to collaborators In response to this: Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please check all the files for Eclipse Public License, some still has EPL copyright, like https://github.com/devfile/api/blob/relicensing/build-generator.sh
|
I approve |
|
I don’t know why I received the email, but I approve |
@girishramnani maybe for this contribution devfile/library#92? |
|
I believe i had given my approval before, but since i don't see my name in
the list of ones who have approved, here it is:
I approve.
Regards,
Kanika Rana
…On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 7:00 AM Mario Loriedo ***@***.***> wrote:
I don’t know why I received the email, but I approve
@girishramnani <https://github.com/girishramnani> maybe for this
contribution devfile/library#92
<devfile/library#92?>?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#547 (comment)>, or
unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ALEZUETLEJ2VUZIH35ZNYNDUBXKUFANCNFSM5AVRRJYA>
.
Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS
<https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675>
or Android
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub>.
--
Best,
Kanika
|
@ranakan19 I can see you checked in the list above. The only missing approval is @Nadianw36 (and @Nwaid but I think that's the same user) but I wasn't able to reach her. Can someone help? |
|
LGTM |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We need to make sure license headers in files are updated as well: #630
One additional concern is that make-release.sh references that it's based on the chectl version, we should make sure this isn't a licensing issue.
|
I got an approval from @Nadianw36, we are ready to merge now. We only need an approval on this PR. |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: benoitf, l0rd, metacosm The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Update the license according to the agreement to switch projects in the devfile organization to Apache instead of EPL 2.0. This should have been done long ago, but was forgotten. Ref: devfile/api#547 Signed-off-by: Angel Misevski <amisevsk@redhat.com>
Update the license according to the agreement to switch projects in the devfile organization to Apache instead of EPL 2.0. This should have been done long ago, but was forgotten. Ref: devfile/api#547 Signed-off-by: Angel Misevski <amisevsk@redhat.com>
What does this PR do?
We are about to propose Devfile as a CNCF sandbox project. Most of the CNCF projects are licensed under Apache-2.0 and that’s what the community is used to. Re-licensing to Apache-2.0 would make the process smoother and augment our chances to successfully transition the project to CNCF sandbox. Both EPL-2.0 and Apache-2.0 are open source licenses that are widely used in the industry and Apache-2.0 is considered more permissive than EPL-2.0.
What issues does this PR fix or reference?
#426
Contributors list (checked ones have approved the re-licensing)