-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
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
UR20 description and meshes #657
Conversation
The UR20 meshes are added under Universal Robots A/S' Terms and Conditions for Use of Graphical Documentation
thanks for the URDF and meshes 🎉 |
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.
Maybe we also want to add a README explaining the licensing situation with the UR20 meshes as we did it for the ROS 2 description?
@gavanderhoorn I feel like this would be a sensible point to create a noetic-devel
branch. Technically, this would probably be possible to build and use on ROS noetic, as well, but since melodic isn't actively maintained anymore I feel like adding new features to a melodic-devel
branch seems wrong.
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.
With the cmake version increase of the UR16e being the only thing not necessarily belonging to this PR I woud be fine merging this. We'll just have to decide on the target branch.
I agree with merging this to |
Alright, I'll merge this on Friday then and start releasing from a |
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.
First round of comments.
Code change suggestions Co-authored-by: Felix Exner (fexner) <felix_mauch@web.de> Co-authored-by: G.A. vd. Hoorn <g.a.vanderhoorn@tudelft.nl>
Add additional UR20 meshes licens comment Remove Changelog for ur20_moveit
Co-authored-by: Felix Exner (fexner) <felix_mauch@web.de>
Please squash the commits when it is ready for getting merged. |
Co-authored-by: Felix Exner (fexner) <felix_mauch@web.de>
@gavanderhoorn Could you give this another review please? |
what's blocking this PR from merging? |
A review requesting changes (or a re-review to be more precise, since these comments have been addressed). |
@gavanderhoorn it would valuable if you could fine the time in the near future to review this PR again. |
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.
apologies for my delayed reply.
I've left a couple in-line comments, which I expect are easily resolved.
If desired, I can review again tomorrow, or early next week.
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 storing the license file in the repository. It's essentially a contract, and clients should have a copy of that contract if they are going to be bound by it.
[![License](https://img.shields.io/badge/License-BSD%203--Clause-blue.svg)](https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause) | ||
|
||
[![License](https://img.shields.io/badge/License-Universal%20Robots%20A/S%E2%80%99%20Terms%20and%20Conditions%20for%20Use%20of%20Graphical%20Documentation-blue.svg)](https://www.universal-robots.com/legal/terms-and-conditions/terms_and_conditions_for_use_of_graphical_documentation.txt) |
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.
Should we instead make this point to the ur_description/meshes/ur20/LICENSE.txt
file? The online version could be changed at any time. The files in this repository would fall under the version of the license as it is right now, in this PR. It would make sense to me to make this badge link to the version the files would fall under.
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.
From what I understood, the license is structured such that the latest version always is relevant (see point 1.4)
... If you download a software package that includes the Graphical Documentation, your use of the Graphical Documentation will be subject to and governed by the latest version of the T&Cs, which can be found here: ...
Given that clause I think it does make sense to link to the online version.
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'm not sure that's legal. There would be no change notification to current users, UR would be able to silently, unilaterally change the complete license without anyone being aware of it, and with all licenses I've worked with (and in the jurisdictions I've had to work with licenses), once you have a copy of the artefacts under that license, that copy and/or version will always fall under the version of the license as it was when you agreed to it.
I have seen licenses where there are provisions for updates made by the licensor, but those always include some sort of notification period, allowing current licensees to terminate their use of whatever is under the existing license if they feel they can't, or don't want to, agree to the new version.
Additionally, there is already a copy of the current version in the repository -- or at least there will be, after merging this PR.
It's best practice to include a copy of the license in all cases, even with OSS licenses. We don't do that currently in this repository, but that's an omission and should be fixed (in a later PR).
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.
The same section 1.4 also states:
However, you may only make the Graphical Documentation or any whole or partial copies thereof available to the public via download if it is part of a downloadable software package that includes a copy of the T&Cs.
which is what this PR will result in: a copy will be included.
So it doesn't seem strange to me to then point to that copy, and not the online version.
That seems like it would just lead to confusing situations.
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.
You have a point. Though the motivation was to remove the burden from the repo owner to ensure that the license is up to date.
I've approved the changes to the previous review so as to not block this. I've left new comments as comments, so they don't block. |
Co-authored-by: G.A. vd. Hoorn <g.a.vanderhoorn@tudelft.nl>
Co-authored-by: G.A. vd. Hoorn <g.a.vanderhoorn@tudelft.nl>
Added clarifying text reading the UR license to the Readme
still eagerly waiting for this to get merged and released 🙄 |
As discussed and requested by UR, I'll leave the license badge point to the online version and merge things as they currently are. |
The UR20 meshes are added under Universal Robots A/S’ Terms and Conditions for Use of Graphical Documentation