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

pypi release #17

Closed
ludwiglierhammer opened this issue Mar 6, 2024 · 10 comments
Closed

pypi release #17

ludwiglierhammer opened this issue Mar 6, 2024 · 10 comments
Assignees
Labels
help wanted Extra attention is needed

Comments

@ludwiglierhammer
Copy link
Collaborator

Goal

make a cdm_reader_mapper release on pypi

Questions

  • author list:

    • is the current list ok?
    • is anybody missing?
  • is the curent MIT license ok?

  • who could answer those questions?

  • may help: @aanderss, @jtsiddons

Notes

@ludwiglierhammer ludwiglierhammer added the help wanted Extra attention is needed label Mar 6, 2024
This was referenced Jun 3, 2024
@ludwiglierhammer ludwiglierhammer self-assigned this Jun 5, 2024
@rcornes
Copy link

rcornes commented Jun 6, 2024

  • Author list and Acknowledgements: looks good to me
  • License: we tend to favour the CC-BY-4.0 licence for our code
  • Github A/C: @rcornes

@ludwiglierhammer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@rcornes: Thanks for the information ☀️
@aanderss: Is license CC-BY-4.0 also ok for us? If so, I would change the glamod-marine-processing license in the same way.

@ludwiglierhammer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ludwiglierhammer commented Jun 14, 2024

@rcornes, @aanderss: regarding the licensing issue:

I found an interesting discussion about Creative Commons Licenses and GitHub. As far as I understand it CC-BY-4.0 is for not open-source publication (no guarantee on my part). Perhaps the GNU GPL v3.0 license is the closest to CC-BY 4.0?

At the moment, GitHub does not offer CC-BY-4.0 license, but GNU GPL v3.0. Instead, here are the current provided licenses. Of course, we can simply add CC-BY-4.0 as our license but then it is not one of the "official" ones.

What is your opinion about this?

Edit:
We can use two licenses (e.g.):

  • MIT or GNU GPL v3.0 for the pypi release
  • CC-BY-4.0 for the zenodo DOI (this is the default one)

I have no idea what two licenses exactly mean.

@aanderss
Copy link
Collaborator

@rcornes , @ludwiglierhammer
I can confirm Ludwig's findings regarding the CC license. CC does not recommend to use Creative Commons licenses for software. See the FAQ here: https://creativecommons.org/faq/#can-i-apply-a-creative-commons-license-to-software

I would prefer to choose either MIT or GPL for the code and the release on zenodo. CC appears to be appropriate for documentation etc..

@ludwiglierhammer: Does GPL v3.0 pass the license checker?

@ludwiglierhammer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@rcornes, @aanderss
Unfortunately, license scan failed with GNU GPL v3.0.

FOSSA Status

These packages contain code files that may require you to disclose your source code under a compatible license, 
unless they’re distributed and run as completely separate processes & packages.

@ludwiglierhammer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

If you do not want to use MIT license, is Apache License 2.0 an option.
It is used by xclim and xarray.

@aanderss
Copy link
Collaborator

aanderss commented Jul 3, 2024

Apache License 2.0 is used by other ECMWF software such as ecCodes.
So I recommend using this license - requesting confirmation from project lead.

@rcornes
Copy link

rcornes commented Jul 5, 2024

Happy to go with what you/C3S decide on this.

@ludwiglierhammer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

We use Apache v2.0 license not. See PR #69.

@ludwiglierhammer
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
help wanted Extra attention is needed
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants