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

re-run godep license #38388

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 8, 2016
Merged

re-run godep license #38388

merged 1 commit into from
Dec 8, 2016

Conversation

deads2k
Copy link
Contributor

@deads2k deads2k commented Dec 8, 2016

re-run update-godep-licenses to see what happens. The result looks weird.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label Dec 8, 2016
@k8s-reviewable
Copy link

This change is Reviewable

@dims
Copy link
Member

dims commented Dec 8, 2016

@deads2k must be a fallout from this PR? ad2cfc6

@deads2k
Copy link
Contributor Author

deads2k commented Dec 8, 2016

Looks like #37305 changed it. At least the update makes more sense now.

@deads2k
Copy link
Contributor Author

deads2k commented Dec 8, 2016

@deads2k must be a fallout from this PR? ad2cfc6

Yeah, review?

@k8s-github-robot k8s-github-robot added size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. release-note-label-needed labels Dec 8, 2016
@deads2k deads2k added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. and removed release-note-label-needed labels Dec 8, 2016
@gmarek gmarek added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Dec 8, 2016
@gmarek
Copy link
Contributor

gmarek commented Dec 8, 2016

Thanks @deads2k. Merging to fix SQ.

@dims
Copy link
Member

dims commented Dec 8, 2016

LGTM 👍

@crassirostris
Copy link

Wait, shouldn't we revert LICENSE file in the repo root instead?

Right now we have a license template, not actual license in Godeps/LICENSES

@gmarek
Copy link
Contributor

gmarek commented Dec 8, 2016

@deads2k

@deads2k
Copy link
Contributor Author

deads2k commented Dec 8, 2016

Wait, shouldn't we revert LICENSE file in the repo root instead?

Right now we have a license template, not actual license in Godeps/LICENSES

I will not even pretend to know. It chains to this issue: kubernetes/kubernetes-template-project#3 . I just want a working queue, so any path to getting there works for me.

@crassirostris
Copy link

@deads2k I agree, I will make another PR to fix the issue properly

@gmarek gmarek merged commit ff0516b into kubernetes:master Dec 8, 2016
@mikedanese
Copy link
Member

mikedanese commented Dec 8, 2016

The license in the root is an actual license and is not a license template. Kubernetes is licensed under the license in the root. The license contains an appendix that explains how you too can license your code under the same license. The appendix contains a line:

   Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner]

That people often incorrectly change to

   Copyright 2016 Kubernetes Authors

But that line should remain in template form since it's in the instructional section of how to apply the Apache v2 license.

cc @philips

@crassirostris
Copy link

@mikedanese OK, thanks for the explanation!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

9 participants