Remove invalid license template. #209
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
What is the proposed roll out strategy for this breaking change? |
This was referenced Jan 31, 2020
|
I have opened pull requests against every instance of this template in ros2.repos. |
tfoote
added a commit
to ros2/rcutils
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 1, 2020
re: ament/ament_lint#209 Signed-off-by: Tully Foote <tfoote@osrfoundation.org>
|
@tfoote, are we still interested in getting this in? Can I do anything to help? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Flagged in #109 this template is not a valid template for the BSD license.
The correct license was added in #205
The original author doesn't know where it came from: ros2/geometry2#222 (comment)
This will cause a lot of warnings/errors. But anyone who's using this template for legacy code has modified the license, naming it something that doesn't exist. It doesn't match with legacy code as flagged in ros2/geometry2#222 And anyone who has written new code is not using the standard BSD 3 clause license that we would want because they're trying to pass our linter which wouldn't pass with that in the past. The subtle differences will cause nightmares for due diligence efforts.
The longer we go the worse the problem will be. We could add a backwards compatibility period for a while but there's no way that we'll know that everyone has fixed things, and in that time more people will likely follow the incorrect template.