-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
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
Make repo compliant #126
Make repo compliant #126
Conversation
Thank you for opening this PR! I will review it tomorrow /assign |
So I ran
against the The following files come up as missing copyright and licensing info
This PR introduces a DEP5 file which uses
In addition to that I am not sure that we should license trivial files like github PR templates, Some of the files in So my two questions are:
|
Thanks for your feedback/comments
This is a known issue of the reuse tool discussed here and a bug here. For now we don't need to worry about it. Answer to question 2)
The reason for having Answer to question 1) For the multiple license issue, REUSE suggests that you add both licenses. I would suggest to add this in the
WDYT? |
This might not be the case if an automatic check is also introduced and ran when a PR is submitted. Similar to how we run tests, linters, formatters.
Yes, I get that the decision multiple files vs * is in the hands of the maintainers of the said repository, however I am missing a general guidance or document that defines all of the requirements that need to be followed in the Gardener org. From my point of view this repository already has copyright information on all (or almost all) relevant files, regardless if the tool recognises them or not. I am not convinced that the following is desirable since there are files in that folder that contain code that is written by the Gardener authors and I am not sure that the Tailwind authors want to impose any copyright claims on it. And what about having files that include just some parts that come from a different source?
Since some of the suggestions refer to Reuse recommendations, I want to point out that Reuse also has a section describing insignificant files (which I mentioned above) and suggests to add a CC0 license for them. However, I have not seen this in any Gardener repository. As I am not a lawyer or a person that is familiar with all the legal aspects of these licenses It is really hard for me to evaluate/review these changes without some general guidance document that I can refer to. |
I did some minor changes to the already suggested modifications. Please check if everything seems OK and we can proceed. |
/lgtm |
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.
/lgtm
What this PR does / why we need it:
What this PR does / why we need it:
LICENSE
fileSECURITY.md
file. It is centrally managed.reuse/dep5
fileLICENSES
folderREADME.md
file