Open avalentino opened 4 days ago
Can I safely assume that data files are provided with the same license of the source code (MIT)?
I don't think so. At least the OSM sample retains ODbL. I am not sure about the rest.
- poly_not_enough_points.shp.zip
This was recently added in https://github.com/geopandas/pyogrio/pull/422. @theroggy did you create this file manually? (would be good to add a note about that in the README then as well)
- test_fgdb.gdb.zip
This is downloaded from https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/raw-attachment/wiki/FileGDB/. @rouault do you know if this wiki falls under the general GDAL license?
- test_mixed_surface.gpkg
This is extracted from one of the datasets from https://www.usgs.gov/national-hydrography/access-national-hydrography-products. I don't directly find anything on that page about the license of those datasets (maybe the USGS has a general license it uses for all available datasets? but not familiar with it) EDIT: https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-are-terms-uselicensing-map-services-and-data-national-map says "public domain"
- test_fgdb.gdb.zip
Maybe @jmckenna remembers the provenance of this file ? Otherwise you could potentially switch to one of the GDAL autotest suite samples: https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/tree/master/autotest/ogr/data/filegdb
- poly_not_enough_points.shp.zip
This was recently added in #422. @theroggy did you create this file manually? (would be good to add a note about that in the README then as well)
No, I exported the polygon giving the issue from the file provided in this issue: https://github.com/geopandas/geopandas/discussions/3336
So, not sure about licensing :-(... @EwoutH can you shed some light?
Should have mentioned that, that file doesn't have a proper open-source license so I don't think it can be in there.
I got it on a project license, see https://mrdh.nl/verkeersmodel.
I think sharing it for debugging was already stretching it now I think of it (but probably ok).
Thanks a lot to everybody for the help.
To summarize the discussion please find below an excerpt of the debian/copyright
file that I'm preparing:
Files: *
Copyright: 2020-2021, Brendan C. Ward and pyogrio contributors
License: Expat
Files: pyogrio/arrow_bridge.h
Copyright: 2020-2021, Brendan C. Ward and pyogrio contributors
License: Apache-2.0
Files: pyogrio/tests/fixtures/naturalearth_lowres/*
pyogrio/tests/fixtures/test_mixed_surface.gpkg
Copyright: discalimed
License: public-domain
Files: pyogrio/tests/fixtures/sample.osm.pbf
Copyright: OpenStreetMap contributors
License: OBdL-1.0
For the time being:
poly_not_enough_points.shp.zip
and skip the associated test_read_invalid_shp
test. At least until teh situation is clarifiedtest_fgdb.gdb.zip
, apparently, the situation is still not totally clear, I can remove it as well for the moment. This implies skipping at least 8 additional testsFor the other files in pyogrio/tests/fixtures
(I mean the one not mentioned in the above debian/copyrigtht
file excerpt) it is assume the same license of the source code.
Please feel free to comment if there is anything that looks incorrect.
I'm in the process of packaging pyogrio for Debian, I hope you are fine with it. TO meet the Debian packaging standards I need to report the license for all files included in the package. I would appreciate a lot if you could clarify what is the license of data files included in
pyogrio/tests/fixtures
, and in particular the license of:poly_not_enough_points.shp.zip
sample.osm.pbf
test_fgdb.gdb.zip
test_mixed_surface.gpkg
The
pyogrio/tests/fixtures/README.md
seems to clarify what is the origin of some of the data files but the license for me is not clear. Can I safely assume that data files are provided with the same license of the source code (MIT)?