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

REUSE compatibility #693

Closed
n0toose opened this issue May 18, 2024 · 3 comments · Fixed by #700
Closed

REUSE compatibility #693

n0toose opened this issue May 18, 2024 · 3 comments · Fixed by #700
Assignees

Comments

@n0toose
Copy link

n0toose commented May 18, 2024

REUSE (reuse.software) is a standard by the Free Software Foundation Europe that is a superset of the SPDX-styled copyright headers that you see in the Linux kernel.

They make reusing source code across separate projects (or entirely different projects) much easier, as you can just copy and paste segments across different projects (or an entirely different project, with different "copyright owners" or even different, but compatible licensing models) without caring too much about the whole compliance part.

In short, the following changes would have to be theoretically made, given that there's interest:

  • Add a copyright header to every source file
  • Move the license file to LICENSES/ (as projects, such as this one, can have more than one license or consist of components that have more than one license)
  • Create a .reuse folder declaring the license information for e.g. binary files, where adding a text header is not possible or practical
  • Optional: Add reuse-action to the CI.

I estimate that this would take approximately 90 minutes, give or take.

@mkroening mkroening self-assigned this May 19, 2024
@jounathaen
Copy link
Member

I discussed this with @mkroening, and we decided not to use copyright headers.
So probably the only action necessary here are:

  • Fix the license files (current one has copyright year XXXX).
  • Potentially move the license files as you suggested.

@mkroening
Copy link
Member

  • Potentially move the license files as you suggested.

I don't think we should move the license files. There is no precedent in the Rust community that I am aware of, but to the best of my knowledge, having LICENSE-APACHE and LICENSE-MIT is the commonly expected package layout.

@mkroening mkroening closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Jun 4, 2024
@n0toose
Copy link
Author

n0toose commented Jun 4, 2024

There is no precedent in the Rust community that I am aware of

Totally agree that this should not be done on its own, as this would be a "partial implementation" of a greater set of standards that is not otherwise seen anywhere, whereas LICENSE-MIT, etc. was a "de facto" standard before REUSE and still existent among open source projects today.

REUSE includes moving the licenses to a LICENSES/ folder with the corresponding SPDX headers as the file name (Example), among other rules.

I'll just work on something less bureaucratic instead. =)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants