-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 538
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 new licenses and license updates #3663
Conversation
These licenses/license updates were added by @DennisClark Signed-off-by: Ayan Sinha Mahapatra <ayansmahapatra@gmail.com>
@AyanSinhaMahapatra It looks like the same test is always failing on macOS
there must be something there. Not a heisenbug |
These were added by @DennisClark Signed-off-by: Ayan Sinha Mahapatra <ayansmahapatra@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ayan Sinha Mahapatra <ayansmahapatra@gmail.com>
@pombredanne this could be something which is affecting macos and needs further review. |
Signed-off-by: Ayan Sinha Mahapatra <ayansmahapatra@gmail.com>
@@ -1,6 +1,8 @@ | |||
--- | |||
license_expression: other-permissive |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@DennisClark we have lots of versions of the Open works License here as rules, since we added the owl-0.9.4.LICENSE
above, should we also add all these rules as seperate licenses as they are different versions?
See details below:
- other-permissive_owl_1.RULE: version 0.4
- other-permissive_owl_2.RULE: version 0.5
- other-permissive_owl_3.RULE: without any version, which license should this be a rule of
- other-permissive_owl_4.RULE: version 0.9.2
- other-permissive_owl_5.RULE: version 0.9.1
- other-permissive_owl_6.RULE: version 0.9
- other-permissive_owl_7.RULE: version 0.8
- other-permissive_owl_8.RULE: version 0.7
- other-permissive_owl_9.RULE: version 0.6
- other-permissive_owl_10.RULE: deprecated and added as the
owl-0.9.4.LICENSE
- other-permissive_owl_11.RULE: version 0.9.3
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think they are used enough to merit adding as new licenses
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks! See some nits for your consideration.
category: Permissive | ||
owner: Stefano Apostolico | ||
homepage_url: https://github.com/saxix/django-adminactions/blob/develop/LICENSE | ||
spdx_license_key: LicenseRef-scancode-saxix-mit |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To avoid false positive with real MIT licenses, I would put a minimum_coverage and some notes to explain the license:
spdx_license_key: LicenseRef-scancode-saxix-mit | |
spdx_license_key: LicenseRef-scancode-saxix-mit | |
minimum_coverage: 95 | |
notes: this is the MIT license text with an extra clause wrt. commercial usage notification. |
BTW, I strongly challenge the fact this is permissive. This license would be a major burden for any downstream user, so we need to tag this as proprietary or source available.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
"major burden" ? I disagree. "Any use in a commercial product must be notified to the author by email
indicating company name and product name." It's just a required notification, and does not indicate that any permission is required. It's more of a special obligation than a restriction. I prefer to leave it as-is.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I am fine with the suggested notes.
@pabs3 FYI, many of these licenses were added based on your posts on IRC! 🙇 |
Signed-off-by: Ayan Sinha Mahapatra <ayansmahapatra@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Ayan Sinha Mahapatra <ayansmahapatra@gmail.com>
14f0fa2
to
cfe6d13
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I just added a minor nit, looking fine otherwise and ready to merge. Just remove curlies from the main license text.
Signed-off-by: Ayan Sinha Mahapatra <ayansmahapatra@gmail.com>
569e43f
to
ed4926a
Compare
Merging! Thanks @pombredanne @DennisClark @pabs3 |
FTR: about the Stefano Apostolico MIT License, the requirement to
contact the authors fails the Debian Free Software Guidelines (and the
Open Source Definition based on them) because it discriminates against
people who cannot do that or those who would be adversely affected by
it; such as someone without an email account, a domestic violence
victim, someone living on a desert island, or a dissident in a
repressive regime. The Debian pages for these tests:
https://wiki.debian.org/DesertIslandTest
https://wiki.debian.org/DissidentTest
…--
bye,
pabs
https://bonedaddy.net/pabs3/
|
Also adds some updates to licenses added through #3653 for SPDX license list 3.23.
Reference: nexB/scancode-licensedb#49
Tasks
Run tests locally to check for errors.