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

Check copyright statements and SPDX license statements #8470

Merged

Conversation

gilles-peskine-arm
Copy link
Contributor

@gilles-peskine-arm gilles-peskine-arm commented Nov 3, 2023

Check copyright statements and SPDX license statements, where present. Also complain about suspicious mentions of a license.

Priority justification: with the license change, we want the CI to complain if we try to add files with an obsolete license header.

Out of scope: enforcing the presence of copyright and license statements. Maybe we want this, but it's a completely different task.

The reporting isn't very nice (it just says “License issue”) because of preexisting technical debt. There's a fix but it needs rework and review. Getting the check in is more urgent.

PR checklist

Please tick as appropriate and edit the reasons (e.g.: "backport: not needed because this is a new feature")

@gilles-peskine-arm gilles-peskine-arm added needs-review Every commit must be reviewed by at least two team members, needs-backports Backports are missing or are pending review and approval. needs-preceding-pr Requires another PR to be merged first needs-reviewer This PR needs someone to pick it up for review priority-very-high Highest priority - prioritise this over other review work size-xs Estimated task size: extra small (a few hours at most) labels Nov 3, 2023
@daverodgman daverodgman self-requested a review November 3, 2023 14:12
@gilles-peskine-arm gilles-peskine-arm mentioned this pull request Nov 3, 2023
3 tasks
Signed-off-by: Gilles Peskine <Gilles.Peskine@arm.com>
Enforce a specific copyright statement and a specific SPDX license
identifier where they are present.

Binary files, third-party modules and a few other exceptions are not
checked.

There is currently no check that copyright statements and license
identifiers are present.

Signed-off-by: Gilles Peskine <Gilles.Peskine@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Gilles Peskine <Gilles.Peskine@arm.com>
Signed-off-by: Gilles Peskine <Gilles.Peskine@arm.com>
@gilles-peskine-arm gilles-peskine-arm removed the needs-preceding-pr Requires another PR to be merged first label Nov 4, 2023
@mpg mpg removed the needs-reviewer This PR needs someone to pick it up for review label Nov 6, 2023
@mpg mpg self-requested a review November 6, 2023 09:34
Copy link
Contributor

@mpg mpg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@mpg mpg added approved Design and code approved - may be waiting for CI or backports and removed needs-review Every commit must be reviewed by at least two team members, labels Nov 6, 2023
@daverodgman daverodgman added this pull request to the merge queue Nov 6, 2023
@daverodgman daverodgman removed the needs-backports Backports are missing or are pending review and approval. label Nov 6, 2023
Merged via the queue into Mbed-TLS:development with commit b578514 Nov 6, 2023
1 check passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Design and code approved - may be waiting for CI or backports priority-very-high Highest priority - prioritise this over other review work size-xs Estimated task size: extra small (a few hours at most)
Projects
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants