search

ros-infrastructure / superflore

An extended platform release manager for Robot Operating System
Apache License 2.0
52 stars 33 forks source link

What's the license of generated recipes by superflore #297

Open JasonShigit opened 1 year ago

JasonShigit commented 1 year ago

hi @allenh1

Since meta-ros for openembeded is not updated for a long time. We want to upgrade add "humble" distro in meta-ros and release. For now, we have finished generated recipes with superflore tool and build passed.

But for release, we need confirmation from you: What's the explicit license for generated recipes by superflore tool?

It's very important for, hope you can confirm it for me! Thanks so much

allenh1 commented 1 year ago

@JasonShigit Hi! The license of the generated recipes appears to be undefined... I would expect the license to be seen here. Perhaps @herb-kuta-lge could clarify?

For Gentoo ebuilds, it is a BSD license.

It would be great, however, if the license org and type could be passed via CLI. @JasonShigit would you be open to adding a --license-org and --license-text option to the [parser] https://github.com/ros-infrastructure/superflore/blob/master/superflore/parser.py#L19)? I think a reasonable default would be "Open Source Robotics Foundation", and "Apache-2.0".

@tfoote / @nuclearsandwich do you have any thoughts here?

JasonShigit commented 1 year ago

@allenh1 Thanks for your reply. It's my pleasure to contribute to the project. I want to confirm: adding a --license-org and --license-text option to the [parser]

Then if we don't provide --license-org and --license-text, then default license would be "Open Source Robotics Foundation", and "Apache-2.0". If we provide --license-org and --license-text, this means we can change the license at runtime.

I'm not sure it's fine to change lisense text to "MIT", "GPL", "BSD" or someting else. If not, maybe the license text would be added in hardcode.

allenh1 commented 1 year ago

Then if we don't provide --license-org and --license-text, then default license would be "Open Source Robotics Foundation", and "Apache-2.0". If we provide --license-org and --license-text, this means we can change the license at runtime.

@JasonShigit that's the idea.

I'm not sure it's fine to change lisense text to "MIT", "GPL", "BSD" or someting else. If not, maybe the license text would be added in hardcode.

Yeah, I suppose we should leave the existing licenses as they are currently. So the --license-text should be empty for Open Embedded, and "BSD" for Gentoo.

This allows someone to create their own repo / fork of the main repo, and pick whatever license suits their needs.