-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
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
Move to Apache v2.0 License #658
Comments
License has been changed, feel free to do a sanity check @caniszczyk. Once approved, I'll make same changes to other repos in our org (other than samples, if ok) |
LGTM thanks, please enforce across all other repos |
I'll reopen it to keep track of it! |
Relates to kedacore/keda#658
Relates to kedacore/keda#658
Relates to kedacore/keda#658
Relates to kedacore/keda#658
Relates to kedacore/keda#658
Relates to kedacore/keda#658
Relates to kedacore/keda#658
Relates to kedacore/keda#658
@tomkerkhove maybe we should add a pre-commit check to assert licenses are present? That's what we do in Airflow. It's always good to automate boring stuff :) There's a nice framework to manage pre-commit hooks: https://pre-commit.com and here's list of check we do in Airflow: https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/master/.pre-commit-config.yaml I'm personally using pre-commits for linting go. |
@nuclearpinguin the pre-commit check is supposed to check that the licence is not removed in that particullar commit? Or what is the specific usecase? |
@zroubalik it checks if license is present, if not it adds the missing license. In the end, the developer doesn't have to care about the license as long as the pre-commit is installed :) It's also easy to run all checks on CI using Edit: and the pre-commit check license on per file basis. In ASF project the license is required in every file. |
@nuclearpinguin gotcha! PR is a great idea |
You are more talking about license mentioned in all source code files rather than the repo license itself, right? @caniszczyk Do we have to add licenses to all source code files? If not, I'd say we are good without to reduce the "noise". |
Yup (edit in my last comment). I do not know if CNCF requires them. If not, no need for such automation. |
Relates to kedacore/keda#658
Relates to kedacore/keda#658
Relates to kedacore/keda#658
Relates to kedacore/keda#658
Based on that I think we are good with only DCO & our updated license. Closing. |
Co-authored-by: Yarden Siboni <yasiboni@microsoft.com> Co-authored-by: Tom Kerkhove <kerkhove.tom@gmail.com>
Since KEDA is becoming a CNCF Sandbox project, it will have to adhere to the CNCF IP Policy:
https://github.com/cncf/foundation/blob/master/charter.md#11-ip-policy
Apache v2.0 License + DCO is the easiest and lowest path forward imho.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: