You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@kie.apache.org by Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com> on 2024/11/26 06:55:59 UTC
[HEADS UP] License check
Hi,
I think every committer needs to be aware of the requirements, because this
topic always matters while we maintain source codes.
Per discussion
https://lists.apache.org/thread/nrq50szwx37doopb23wyq33v0t3bbccg ,
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-469
`3rd party Category X or Category B bundled code licenses not listed in
LICENSE` is the one major blocker of the 10.0.0 release.
It means, if we have Category X or Category B licensed source code, we have
to list the file path and its license in the `LICENSE` file at this stage.
(Eventually, we will need to remove them before incubator graduation)
"Category" is explained here: https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
In the discussion, 2 cases were highlighted.
-
`./incubator-kie-tools/packages/stunner-editors/errai-common/src/main/java/org/jboss/errai/common/compat/javax/annotation/processing/Generated.java`,
which is dual licensed --- CDDL (Category B) or GPL (Category X).
-> For main, it's handled by
https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746 , but make sure
that it's resolved in 10.0.0 build.
- `incubator-kie-drools/drools-docs/supplemental-ui/js/search-ui.js`, which
is MPL (Category B).
-> We will exclude `drools-docs` from the source distribution.
However, there may be more cases. We need to scrutinize all source codes to
find source codes with licenses missing in the `LICENSE` file.
I filed a GH issue for this with the steps to check.
https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
I have done the check for drools. For other repos, the following PRs
are/were fixing license issues.
https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130 (Merged)
https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes/pull/3714
https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/pull/2111
https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746
I think all these PRs made good progress (might fix all issues), but it
would be great if more people review from this point of view.
Alex might start rc4 build, so new findings may not be in time for rc4, but
it should be good to proceed the work.
Cheers,
Toshiya
Re: [HEADS UP] License check
Posted by Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com>.
Hi all,
Just to mention that I have added a wiki page for the license review and
tips.
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KIE/License+Review+in+KIE+projects
Cheers,
Toshiya
On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 8:37 PM Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti <
ftirados@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi Josef,
> It`s green now. I should have checked the license check PR before asking in
> the list ;)
> Thank you and great work!
>
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 12:28 PM Jozef Marko <Jo...@ibm.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Francisco, I should be able to help with this if you still need a help
> > or you have any question.
> >
> >
> > Jozef Marko
> >
> > Software Developer
> >
> > jozef.marko@ibm.com
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti <ft...@redhat.com>
> > Sent: Friday, December 20, 2024 12:21 PM
> > To: dev@kie.apache.org <de...@kie.apache.org>
> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [HEADS UP] License check
> >
> > Ok,
> > I just see there is rat-exludes file, I will add an exception for this
> new
> > file.
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 12:19 PM Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti <
> > ftirados@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > > Regarding License header check on PRs, how can we include exceptions?
> > > For example, graphql schema files.
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/pull/2166/files#diff-30fa722ec7a5efd9e20355fb704849691aea2fde8cea85af1a0ec0848e0de628
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/actions/runs/12423080843/job/34685997897?pr=2166
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 12:37 PM Jozef Marko
> <Jozef.Marko@ibm.com.invalid
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi Toshiya
> > >>
> > >> I started to do the same check for apps and tools. Sharing status in
> the
> > >> same way as you did, in the same github ticket.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Jozef Marko
> > >>
> > >> Software Developer
> > >>
> > >> jozef.marko@ibm.com
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ________________________________
> > >> From: Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com>
> > >> Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2024 10:47 AM
> > >> To: dev@kie.apache.org <de...@kie.apache.org>
> > >> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [HEADS UP] License check
> > >>
> > >> Thank you very much for the big efforts on those PRs.
> > >>
> > >> I have started reviewing source codes from the "Category X or Category
> > B"
> > >> blocker point of view.
> > >>
> > >> I posted my progress as
> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
> > comments.
> > >>
> > >> So far, I don't see a blocker in drools, optaplanner, kogito-runtimes
> > (one
> > >> suggestion for 10.0.x though).
> > >>
> > >> More eyes would be welcome. Especially kogito-apps and kie-tools,
> which
> > I
> > >> haven't looked at yet.
> > >>
> > >> Cheers,
> > >> Toshiya
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 12:03 AM Jozef Marko
> > <Jozef.Marko@ibm.com.invalid
> > >> >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hello everyone, let me share the status of this topic.
> > >> >
> > >> > I think currently the initiative has two main parts that are in
> active
> > >> > state:
> > >> >
> > >> > 1.
> > >> > automate the license headers checking in the Apache KIE upstream
> > >> codebase
> > >> > 2.
> > >> > ensure the licensing info is correct, mainly in LICENSE and NOTICE
> > files
> > >> >
> > >> > For both points we have separate tickets:
> > >> >
> > >> > 1.
> > >> > Ticket #1613 [1], where you can see a list of pull request for main
> > and
> > >> > 10.0.x branches. these pull requests introduce new github action
> > "Check
> > >> > license headers" for each repository
> > >> > 2.
> > >> > Ticket #1634 [2], where we want to be sure, licensing info we have
> in
> > >> > codebase is correct, and it is not in conflict with the Apache rules
> > >> >
> > >> > Unfortunately, both points are very related. So the pull requests
> for
> > >> the
> > >> > point (1. - Ticket #1613) touch also the LICENSE and NOTICE files,
> > that
> > >> are
> > >> > main subject of the point (2. - Ticket #1634)
> > >> >
> > >> > I am sorry for this. I did my best to split the work as much as
> > >> possible.
> > >> >
> > >> > So basically the point (1. - Ticket #1613) is done, we just need
> > reviews
> > >> > and merge of created pull request for main and 10.0.x.
> > >> >
> > >> > From my point of view once such pull request are merged, we can
> finish
> > >> the
> > >> > point (2. - Ticket #1634).
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Thank you everyone, who helped me as reviewer on github as support
> in
> > >> > private conversations, ... . Thank you all!
> > >> >
> > >> > [1]
> > >> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1613
> > >> >
> > >> > [2]
> > >> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Jozef Marko
> > >> >
> > >> > Software Developer
> > >> >
> > >> > jozef.marko@ibm.com
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > ________________________________
> > >> > From: Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com>
> > >> > Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2024 4:11 AM
> > >> > To: dev@kie.apache.org <de...@kie.apache.org>
> > >> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [HEADS UP] License check
> > >> >
> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130
> > >> (Merged)
> > >> >
> > >> > for optaplanner, it's good to look at this PR now:
> > >> >
> > >> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3144
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 3:55 PM Toshiya Kobayashi <
> > >> > toshiyakobayashi@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Hi,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I think every committer needs to be aware of the requirements,
> > because
> > >> > > this topic always matters while we maintain source codes.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Per discussion
> > >> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/nrq50szwx37doopb23wyq33v0t3bbccg
> > >> ,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-469
> > >> > > `3rd party Category X or Category B bundled code licenses not
> listed
> > >> in
> > >> > > LICENSE` is the one major blocker of the 10.0.0 release.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > It means, if we have Category X or Category B licensed source
> code,
> > we
> > >> > > have to list the file path and its license in the `LICENSE` file
> at
> > >> this
> > >> > > stage. (Eventually, we will need to remove them before incubator
> > >> > graduation)
> > >> > >
> > >> > > "Category" is explained here:
> > >> https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
> > >> > >
> > >> > > In the discussion, 2 cases were highlighted.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > -
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> `./incubator-kie-tools/packages/stunner-editors/errai-common/src/main/java/org/jboss/errai/common/compat/javax/annotation/processing/Generated.java`,
> > >> > > which is dual licensed --- CDDL (Category B) or GPL (Category X).
> > >> > > -> For main, it's handled by
> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746 ,
> but
> > >> make
> > >> > sure
> > >> > > that it's resolved in 10.0.0 build.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > -
> > `incubator-kie-drools/drools-docs/supplemental-ui/js/search-ui.js`,
> > >> > > which is MPL (Category B).
> > >> > > -> We will exclude `drools-docs` from the source distribution.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > However, there may be more cases. We need to scrutinize all source
> > >> codes
> > >> > > to find source codes with licenses missing in the `LICENSE` file.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I filed a GH issue for this with the steps to check.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I have done the check for drools. For other repos, the following
> PRs
> > >> > > are/were fixing license issues.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130
> > >> (Merged)
> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes/pull/3714
> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/pull/2111
> > >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I think all these PRs made good progress (might fix all issues),
> but
> > >> it
> > >> > > would be great if more people review from this point of view.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Alex might start rc4 build, so new findings may not be in time for
> > >> rc4,
> > >> > > but it should be good to proceed the work.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Cheers,
> > >> > > Toshiya
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
Re: [HEADS UP] License check
Posted by Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti <ft...@redhat.com>.
Hi Josef,
It`s green now. I should have checked the license check PR before asking in
the list ;)
Thank you and great work!
On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 12:28 PM Jozef Marko <Jo...@ibm.com.invalid>
wrote:
> Hi Francisco, I should be able to help with this if you still need a help
> or you have any question.
>
>
> Jozef Marko
>
> Software Developer
>
> jozef.marko@ibm.com
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti <ft...@redhat.com>
> Sent: Friday, December 20, 2024 12:21 PM
> To: dev@kie.apache.org <de...@kie.apache.org>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [HEADS UP] License check
>
> Ok,
> I just see there is rat-exludes file, I will add an exception for this new
> file.
>
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 12:19 PM Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti <
> ftirados@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > Regarding License header check on PRs, how can we include exceptions?
> > For example, graphql schema files.
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/pull/2166/files#diff-30fa722ec7a5efd9e20355fb704849691aea2fde8cea85af1a0ec0848e0de628
> >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/actions/runs/12423080843/job/34685997897?pr=2166
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 12:37 PM Jozef Marko <Jozef.Marko@ibm.com.invalid
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Toshiya
> >>
> >> I started to do the same check for apps and tools. Sharing status in the
> >> same way as you did, in the same github ticket.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Jozef Marko
> >>
> >> Software Developer
> >>
> >> jozef.marko@ibm.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >> From: Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com>
> >> Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2024 10:47 AM
> >> To: dev@kie.apache.org <de...@kie.apache.org>
> >> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [HEADS UP] License check
> >>
> >> Thank you very much for the big efforts on those PRs.
> >>
> >> I have started reviewing source codes from the "Category X or Category
> B"
> >> blocker point of view.
> >>
> >> I posted my progress as
> >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
> comments.
> >>
> >> So far, I don't see a blocker in drools, optaplanner, kogito-runtimes
> (one
> >> suggestion for 10.0.x though).
> >>
> >> More eyes would be welcome. Especially kogito-apps and kie-tools, which
> I
> >> haven't looked at yet.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Toshiya
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 12:03 AM Jozef Marko
> <Jozef.Marko@ibm.com.invalid
> >> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hello everyone, let me share the status of this topic.
> >> >
> >> > I think currently the initiative has two main parts that are in active
> >> > state:
> >> >
> >> > 1.
> >> > automate the license headers checking in the Apache KIE upstream
> >> codebase
> >> > 2.
> >> > ensure the licensing info is correct, mainly in LICENSE and NOTICE
> files
> >> >
> >> > For both points we have separate tickets:
> >> >
> >> > 1.
> >> > Ticket #1613 [1], where you can see a list of pull request for main
> and
> >> > 10.0.x branches. these pull requests introduce new github action
> "Check
> >> > license headers" for each repository
> >> > 2.
> >> > Ticket #1634 [2], where we want to be sure, licensing info we have in
> >> > codebase is correct, and it is not in conflict with the Apache rules
> >> >
> >> > Unfortunately, both points are very related. So the pull requests for
> >> the
> >> > point (1. - Ticket #1613) touch also the LICENSE and NOTICE files,
> that
> >> are
> >> > main subject of the point (2. - Ticket #1634)
> >> >
> >> > I am sorry for this. I did my best to split the work as much as
> >> possible.
> >> >
> >> > So basically the point (1. - Ticket #1613) is done, we just need
> reviews
> >> > and merge of created pull request for main and 10.0.x.
> >> >
> >> > From my point of view once such pull request are merged, we can finish
> >> the
> >> > point (2. - Ticket #1634).
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Thank you everyone, who helped me as reviewer on github as support in
> >> > private conversations, ... . Thank you all!
> >> >
> >> > [1]
> >> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1613
> >> >
> >> > [2]
> >> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Jozef Marko
> >> >
> >> > Software Developer
> >> >
> >> > jozef.marko@ibm.com
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > ________________________________
> >> > From: Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com>
> >> > Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2024 4:11 AM
> >> > To: dev@kie.apache.org <de...@kie.apache.org>
> >> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [HEADS UP] License check
> >> >
> >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130
> >> (Merged)
> >> >
> >> > for optaplanner, it's good to look at this PR now:
> >> >
> >> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3144
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 3:55 PM Toshiya Kobayashi <
> >> > toshiyakobayashi@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Hi,
> >> > >
> >> > > I think every committer needs to be aware of the requirements,
> because
> >> > > this topic always matters while we maintain source codes.
> >> > >
> >> > > Per discussion
> >> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/nrq50szwx37doopb23wyq33v0t3bbccg
> >> ,
> >> > >
> >> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-469
> >> > > `3rd party Category X or Category B bundled code licenses not listed
> >> in
> >> > > LICENSE` is the one major blocker of the 10.0.0 release.
> >> > >
> >> > > It means, if we have Category X or Category B licensed source code,
> we
> >> > > have to list the file path and its license in the `LICENSE` file at
> >> this
> >> > > stage. (Eventually, we will need to remove them before incubator
> >> > graduation)
> >> > >
> >> > > "Category" is explained here:
> >> https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
> >> > >
> >> > > In the discussion, 2 cases were highlighted.
> >> > >
> >> > > -
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> `./incubator-kie-tools/packages/stunner-editors/errai-common/src/main/java/org/jboss/errai/common/compat/javax/annotation/processing/Generated.java`,
> >> > > which is dual licensed --- CDDL (Category B) or GPL (Category X).
> >> > > -> For main, it's handled by
> >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746 , but
> >> make
> >> > sure
> >> > > that it's resolved in 10.0.0 build.
> >> > >
> >> > > -
> `incubator-kie-drools/drools-docs/supplemental-ui/js/search-ui.js`,
> >> > > which is MPL (Category B).
> >> > > -> We will exclude `drools-docs` from the source distribution.
> >> > >
> >> > > However, there may be more cases. We need to scrutinize all source
> >> codes
> >> > > to find source codes with licenses missing in the `LICENSE` file.
> >> > >
> >> > > I filed a GH issue for this with the steps to check.
> >> > >
> >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
> >> > >
> >> > > I have done the check for drools. For other repos, the following PRs
> >> > > are/were fixing license issues.
> >> > >
> >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130
> >> (Merged)
> >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes/pull/3714
> >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/pull/2111
> >> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746
> >> > >
> >> > > I think all these PRs made good progress (might fix all issues), but
> >> it
> >> > > would be great if more people review from this point of view.
> >> > >
> >> > > Alex might start rc4 build, so new findings may not be in time for
> >> rc4,
> >> > > but it should be good to proceed the work.
> >> > >
> >> > > Cheers,
> >> > > Toshiya
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
>
RE: [HEADS UP] License check
Posted by Jozef Marko <Jo...@ibm.com.INVALID>.
Hi Francisco, I should be able to help with this if you still need a help or you have any question.
Jozef Marko
Software Developer
jozef.marko@ibm.com
________________________________
From: Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti <ft...@redhat.com>
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2024 12:21 PM
To: dev@kie.apache.org <de...@kie.apache.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [HEADS UP] License check
Ok,
I just see there is rat-exludes file, I will add an exception for this new
file.
On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 12:19 PM Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti <
ftirados@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> Regarding License header check on PRs, how can we include exceptions?
> For example, graphql schema files.
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/pull/2166/files#diff-30fa722ec7a5efd9e20355fb704849691aea2fde8cea85af1a0ec0848e0de628
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/actions/runs/12423080843/job/34685997897?pr=2166
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 12:37 PM Jozef Marko <Jo...@ibm.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Toshiya
>>
>> I started to do the same check for apps and tools. Sharing status in the
>> same way as you did, in the same github ticket.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jozef Marko
>>
>> Software Developer
>>
>> jozef.marko@ibm.com
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2024 10:47 AM
>> To: dev@kie.apache.org <de...@kie.apache.org>
>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [HEADS UP] License check
>>
>> Thank you very much for the big efforts on those PRs.
>>
>> I have started reviewing source codes from the "Category X or Category B"
>> blocker point of view.
>>
>> I posted my progress as
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634 comments.
>>
>> So far, I don't see a blocker in drools, optaplanner, kogito-runtimes (one
>> suggestion for 10.0.x though).
>>
>> More eyes would be welcome. Especially kogito-apps and kie-tools, which I
>> haven't looked at yet.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Toshiya
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 12:03 AM Jozef Marko <Jozef.Marko@ibm.com.invalid
>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hello everyone, let me share the status of this topic.
>> >
>> > I think currently the initiative has two main parts that are in active
>> > state:
>> >
>> > 1.
>> > automate the license headers checking in the Apache KIE upstream
>> codebase
>> > 2.
>> > ensure the licensing info is correct, mainly in LICENSE and NOTICE files
>> >
>> > For both points we have separate tickets:
>> >
>> > 1.
>> > Ticket #1613 [1], where you can see a list of pull request for main and
>> > 10.0.x branches. these pull requests introduce new github action "Check
>> > license headers" for each repository
>> > 2.
>> > Ticket #1634 [2], where we want to be sure, licensing info we have in
>> > codebase is correct, and it is not in conflict with the Apache rules
>> >
>> > Unfortunately, both points are very related. So the pull requests for
>> the
>> > point (1. - Ticket #1613) touch also the LICENSE and NOTICE files, that
>> are
>> > main subject of the point (2. - Ticket #1634)
>> >
>> > I am sorry for this. I did my best to split the work as much as
>> possible.
>> >
>> > So basically the point (1. - Ticket #1613) is done, we just need reviews
>> > and merge of created pull request for main and 10.0.x.
>> >
>> > From my point of view once such pull request are merged, we can finish
>> the
>> > point (2. - Ticket #1634).
>> >
>> >
>> > Thank you everyone, who helped me as reviewer on github as support in
>> > private conversations, ... . Thank you all!
>> >
>> > [1]
>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1613
>> >
>> > [2]
>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
>> >
>> >
>> > Jozef Marko
>> >
>> > Software Developer
>> >
>> > jozef.marko@ibm.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ________________________________
>> > From: Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com>
>> > Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2024 4:11 AM
>> > To: dev@kie.apache.org <de...@kie.apache.org>
>> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [HEADS UP] License check
>> >
>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130
>> (Merged)
>> >
>> > for optaplanner, it's good to look at this PR now:
>> >
>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3144
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 3:55 PM Toshiya Kobayashi <
>> > toshiyakobayashi@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > I think every committer needs to be aware of the requirements, because
>> > > this topic always matters while we maintain source codes.
>> > >
>> > > Per discussion
>> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/nrq50szwx37doopb23wyq33v0t3bbccg
>> ,
>> > >
>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-469
>> > > `3rd party Category X or Category B bundled code licenses not listed
>> in
>> > > LICENSE` is the one major blocker of the 10.0.0 release.
>> > >
>> > > It means, if we have Category X or Category B licensed source code, we
>> > > have to list the file path and its license in the `LICENSE` file at
>> this
>> > > stage. (Eventually, we will need to remove them before incubator
>> > graduation)
>> > >
>> > > "Category" is explained here:
>> https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
>> > >
>> > > In the discussion, 2 cases were highlighted.
>> > >
>> > > -
>> > >
>> >
>> `./incubator-kie-tools/packages/stunner-editors/errai-common/src/main/java/org/jboss/errai/common/compat/javax/annotation/processing/Generated.java`,
>> > > which is dual licensed --- CDDL (Category B) or GPL (Category X).
>> > > -> For main, it's handled by
>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746 , but
>> make
>> > sure
>> > > that it's resolved in 10.0.0 build.
>> > >
>> > > - `incubator-kie-drools/drools-docs/supplemental-ui/js/search-ui.js`,
>> > > which is MPL (Category B).
>> > > -> We will exclude `drools-docs` from the source distribution.
>> > >
>> > > However, there may be more cases. We need to scrutinize all source
>> codes
>> > > to find source codes with licenses missing in the `LICENSE` file.
>> > >
>> > > I filed a GH issue for this with the steps to check.
>> > >
>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
>> > >
>> > > I have done the check for drools. For other repos, the following PRs
>> > > are/were fixing license issues.
>> > >
>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130
>> (Merged)
>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes/pull/3714
>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/pull/2111
>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746
>> > >
>> > > I think all these PRs made good progress (might fix all issues), but
>> it
>> > > would be great if more people review from this point of view.
>> > >
>> > > Alex might start rc4 build, so new findings may not be in time for
>> rc4,
>> > > but it should be good to proceed the work.
>> > >
>> > > Cheers,
>> > > Toshiya
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
Re: [HEADS UP] License check
Posted by Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti <ft...@redhat.com>.
Ok,
I just see there is rat-exludes file, I will add an exception for this new
file.
On Fri, Dec 20, 2024 at 12:19 PM Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti <
ftirados@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> Regarding License header check on PRs, how can we include exceptions?
> For example, graphql schema files.
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/pull/2166/files#diff-30fa722ec7a5efd9e20355fb704849691aea2fde8cea85af1a0ec0848e0de628
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/actions/runs/12423080843/job/34685997897?pr=2166
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 12:37 PM Jozef Marko <Jo...@ibm.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Toshiya
>>
>> I started to do the same check for apps and tools. Sharing status in the
>> same way as you did, in the same github ticket.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jozef Marko
>>
>> Software Developer
>>
>> jozef.marko@ibm.com
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2024 10:47 AM
>> To: dev@kie.apache.org <de...@kie.apache.org>
>> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [HEADS UP] License check
>>
>> Thank you very much for the big efforts on those PRs.
>>
>> I have started reviewing source codes from the "Category X or Category B"
>> blocker point of view.
>>
>> I posted my progress as
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634 comments.
>>
>> So far, I don't see a blocker in drools, optaplanner, kogito-runtimes (one
>> suggestion for 10.0.x though).
>>
>> More eyes would be welcome. Especially kogito-apps and kie-tools, which I
>> haven't looked at yet.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Toshiya
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 12:03 AM Jozef Marko <Jozef.Marko@ibm.com.invalid
>> >
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hello everyone, let me share the status of this topic.
>> >
>> > I think currently the initiative has two main parts that are in active
>> > state:
>> >
>> > 1.
>> > automate the license headers checking in the Apache KIE upstream
>> codebase
>> > 2.
>> > ensure the licensing info is correct, mainly in LICENSE and NOTICE files
>> >
>> > For both points we have separate tickets:
>> >
>> > 1.
>> > Ticket #1613 [1], where you can see a list of pull request for main and
>> > 10.0.x branches. these pull requests introduce new github action "Check
>> > license headers" for each repository
>> > 2.
>> > Ticket #1634 [2], where we want to be sure, licensing info we have in
>> > codebase is correct, and it is not in conflict with the Apache rules
>> >
>> > Unfortunately, both points are very related. So the pull requests for
>> the
>> > point (1. - Ticket #1613) touch also the LICENSE and NOTICE files, that
>> are
>> > main subject of the point (2. - Ticket #1634)
>> >
>> > I am sorry for this. I did my best to split the work as much as
>> possible.
>> >
>> > So basically the point (1. - Ticket #1613) is done, we just need reviews
>> > and merge of created pull request for main and 10.0.x.
>> >
>> > From my point of view once such pull request are merged, we can finish
>> the
>> > point (2. - Ticket #1634).
>> >
>> >
>> > Thank you everyone, who helped me as reviewer on github as support in
>> > private conversations, ... . Thank you all!
>> >
>> > [1]
>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1613
>> >
>> > [2]
>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
>> >
>> >
>> > Jozef Marko
>> >
>> > Software Developer
>> >
>> > jozef.marko@ibm.com
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ________________________________
>> > From: Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com>
>> > Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2024 4:11 AM
>> > To: dev@kie.apache.org <de...@kie.apache.org>
>> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [HEADS UP] License check
>> >
>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130
>> (Merged)
>> >
>> > for optaplanner, it's good to look at this PR now:
>> >
>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3144
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 3:55 PM Toshiya Kobayashi <
>> > toshiyakobayashi@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi,
>> > >
>> > > I think every committer needs to be aware of the requirements, because
>> > > this topic always matters while we maintain source codes.
>> > >
>> > > Per discussion
>> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/nrq50szwx37doopb23wyq33v0t3bbccg
>> ,
>> > >
>> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-469
>> > > `3rd party Category X or Category B bundled code licenses not listed
>> in
>> > > LICENSE` is the one major blocker of the 10.0.0 release.
>> > >
>> > > It means, if we have Category X or Category B licensed source code, we
>> > > have to list the file path and its license in the `LICENSE` file at
>> this
>> > > stage. (Eventually, we will need to remove them before incubator
>> > graduation)
>> > >
>> > > "Category" is explained here:
>> https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
>> > >
>> > > In the discussion, 2 cases were highlighted.
>> > >
>> > > -
>> > >
>> >
>> `./incubator-kie-tools/packages/stunner-editors/errai-common/src/main/java/org/jboss/errai/common/compat/javax/annotation/processing/Generated.java`,
>> > > which is dual licensed --- CDDL (Category B) or GPL (Category X).
>> > > -> For main, it's handled by
>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746 , but
>> make
>> > sure
>> > > that it's resolved in 10.0.0 build.
>> > >
>> > > - `incubator-kie-drools/drools-docs/supplemental-ui/js/search-ui.js`,
>> > > which is MPL (Category B).
>> > > -> We will exclude `drools-docs` from the source distribution.
>> > >
>> > > However, there may be more cases. We need to scrutinize all source
>> codes
>> > > to find source codes with licenses missing in the `LICENSE` file.
>> > >
>> > > I filed a GH issue for this with the steps to check.
>> > >
>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
>> > >
>> > > I have done the check for drools. For other repos, the following PRs
>> > > are/were fixing license issues.
>> > >
>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130
>> (Merged)
>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes/pull/3714
>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/pull/2111
>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746
>> > >
>> > > I think all these PRs made good progress (might fix all issues), but
>> it
>> > > would be great if more people review from this point of view.
>> > >
>> > > Alex might start rc4 build, so new findings may not be in time for
>> rc4,
>> > > but it should be good to proceed the work.
>> > >
>> > > Cheers,
>> > > Toshiya
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
Re: [HEADS UP] License check
Posted by Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti <ft...@redhat.com>.
Hi,
Regarding License header check on PRs, how can we include exceptions?
For example, graphql schema files.
https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/pull/2166/files#diff-30fa722ec7a5efd9e20355fb704849691aea2fde8cea85af1a0ec0848e0de628
https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/actions/runs/12423080843/job/34685997897?pr=2166
On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 12:37 PM Jozef Marko <Jo...@ibm.com.invalid>
wrote:
> Hi Toshiya
>
> I started to do the same check for apps and tools. Sharing status in the
> same way as you did, in the same github ticket.
>
>
>
> Jozef Marko
>
> Software Developer
>
> jozef.marko@ibm.com
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2024 10:47 AM
> To: dev@kie.apache.org <de...@kie.apache.org>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [HEADS UP] License check
>
> Thank you very much for the big efforts on those PRs.
>
> I have started reviewing source codes from the "Category X or Category B"
> blocker point of view.
>
> I posted my progress as
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634 comments.
>
> So far, I don't see a blocker in drools, optaplanner, kogito-runtimes (one
> suggestion for 10.0.x though).
>
> More eyes would be welcome. Especially kogito-apps and kie-tools, which I
> haven't looked at yet.
>
> Cheers,
> Toshiya
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 12:03 AM Jozef Marko <Jo...@ibm.com.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello everyone, let me share the status of this topic.
> >
> > I think currently the initiative has two main parts that are in active
> > state:
> >
> > 1.
> > automate the license headers checking in the Apache KIE upstream codebase
> > 2.
> > ensure the licensing info is correct, mainly in LICENSE and NOTICE files
> >
> > For both points we have separate tickets:
> >
> > 1.
> > Ticket #1613 [1], where you can see a list of pull request for main and
> > 10.0.x branches. these pull requests introduce new github action "Check
> > license headers" for each repository
> > 2.
> > Ticket #1634 [2], where we want to be sure, licensing info we have in
> > codebase is correct, and it is not in conflict with the Apache rules
> >
> > Unfortunately, both points are very related. So the pull requests for the
> > point (1. - Ticket #1613) touch also the LICENSE and NOTICE files, that
> are
> > main subject of the point (2. - Ticket #1634)
> >
> > I am sorry for this. I did my best to split the work as much as possible.
> >
> > So basically the point (1. - Ticket #1613) is done, we just need reviews
> > and merge of created pull request for main and 10.0.x.
> >
> > From my point of view once such pull request are merged, we can finish
> the
> > point (2. - Ticket #1634).
> >
> >
> > Thank you everyone, who helped me as reviewer on github as support in
> > private conversations, ... . Thank you all!
> >
> > [1]
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1613
> >
> > [2]
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
> >
> >
> > Jozef Marko
> >
> > Software Developer
> >
> > jozef.marko@ibm.com
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2024 4:11 AM
> > To: dev@kie.apache.org <de...@kie.apache.org>
> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [HEADS UP] License check
> >
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130
> (Merged)
> >
> > for optaplanner, it's good to look at this PR now:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3144
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 3:55 PM Toshiya Kobayashi <
> > toshiyakobayashi@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I think every committer needs to be aware of the requirements, because
> > > this topic always matters while we maintain source codes.
> > >
> > > Per discussion
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/nrq50szwx37doopb23wyq33v0t3bbccg ,
> > >
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-469
> > > `3rd party Category X or Category B bundled code licenses not listed in
> > > LICENSE` is the one major blocker of the 10.0.0 release.
> > >
> > > It means, if we have Category X or Category B licensed source code, we
> > > have to list the file path and its license in the `LICENSE` file at
> this
> > > stage. (Eventually, we will need to remove them before incubator
> > graduation)
> > >
> > > "Category" is explained here:
> https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
> > >
> > > In the discussion, 2 cases were highlighted.
> > >
> > > -
> > >
> >
> `./incubator-kie-tools/packages/stunner-editors/errai-common/src/main/java/org/jboss/errai/common/compat/javax/annotation/processing/Generated.java`,
> > > which is dual licensed --- CDDL (Category B) or GPL (Category X).
> > > -> For main, it's handled by
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746 , but make
> > sure
> > > that it's resolved in 10.0.0 build.
> > >
> > > - `incubator-kie-drools/drools-docs/supplemental-ui/js/search-ui.js`,
> > > which is MPL (Category B).
> > > -> We will exclude `drools-docs` from the source distribution.
> > >
> > > However, there may be more cases. We need to scrutinize all source
> codes
> > > to find source codes with licenses missing in the `LICENSE` file.
> > >
> > > I filed a GH issue for this with the steps to check.
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
> > >
> > > I have done the check for drools. For other repos, the following PRs
> > > are/were fixing license issues.
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130
> (Merged)
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes/pull/3714
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/pull/2111
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746
> > >
> > > I think all these PRs made good progress (might fix all issues), but it
> > > would be great if more people review from this point of view.
> > >
> > > Alex might start rc4 build, so new findings may not be in time for rc4,
> > > but it should be good to proceed the work.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Toshiya
> > >
> >
>
RE: [HEADS UP] License check
Posted by Jozef Marko <Jo...@ibm.com.INVALID>.
Hi Toshiya
I started to do the same check for apps and tools. Sharing status in the same way as you did, in the same github ticket.
Jozef Marko
Software Developer
jozef.marko@ibm.com
________________________________
From: Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 28, 2024 10:47 AM
To: dev@kie.apache.org <de...@kie.apache.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [HEADS UP] License check
Thank you very much for the big efforts on those PRs.
I have started reviewing source codes from the "Category X or Category B"
blocker point of view.
I posted my progress as
https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634 comments.
So far, I don't see a blocker in drools, optaplanner, kogito-runtimes (one
suggestion for 10.0.x though).
More eyes would be welcome. Especially kogito-apps and kie-tools, which I
haven't looked at yet.
Cheers,
Toshiya
On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 12:03 AM Jozef Marko <Jo...@ibm.com.invalid>
wrote:
> Hello everyone, let me share the status of this topic.
>
> I think currently the initiative has two main parts that are in active
> state:
>
> 1.
> automate the license headers checking in the Apache KIE upstream codebase
> 2.
> ensure the licensing info is correct, mainly in LICENSE and NOTICE files
>
> For both points we have separate tickets:
>
> 1.
> Ticket #1613 [1], where you can see a list of pull request for main and
> 10.0.x branches. these pull requests introduce new github action "Check
> license headers" for each repository
> 2.
> Ticket #1634 [2], where we want to be sure, licensing info we have in
> codebase is correct, and it is not in conflict with the Apache rules
>
> Unfortunately, both points are very related. So the pull requests for the
> point (1. - Ticket #1613) touch also the LICENSE and NOTICE files, that are
> main subject of the point (2. - Ticket #1634)
>
> I am sorry for this. I did my best to split the work as much as possible.
>
> So basically the point (1. - Ticket #1613) is done, we just need reviews
> and merge of created pull request for main and 10.0.x.
>
> From my point of view once such pull request are merged, we can finish the
> point (2. - Ticket #1634).
>
>
> Thank you everyone, who helped me as reviewer on github as support in
> private conversations, ... . Thank you all!
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1613
>
> [2]
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
>
>
> Jozef Marko
>
> Software Developer
>
> jozef.marko@ibm.com
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2024 4:11 AM
> To: dev@kie.apache.org <de...@kie.apache.org>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [HEADS UP] License check
>
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130 (Merged)
>
> for optaplanner, it's good to look at this PR now:
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3144
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 3:55 PM Toshiya Kobayashi <
> toshiyakobayashi@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think every committer needs to be aware of the requirements, because
> > this topic always matters while we maintain source codes.
> >
> > Per discussion
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/nrq50szwx37doopb23wyq33v0t3bbccg ,
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-469
> > `3rd party Category X or Category B bundled code licenses not listed in
> > LICENSE` is the one major blocker of the 10.0.0 release.
> >
> > It means, if we have Category X or Category B licensed source code, we
> > have to list the file path and its license in the `LICENSE` file at this
> > stage. (Eventually, we will need to remove them before incubator
> graduation)
> >
> > "Category" is explained here: https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
> >
> > In the discussion, 2 cases were highlighted.
> >
> > -
> >
> `./incubator-kie-tools/packages/stunner-editors/errai-common/src/main/java/org/jboss/errai/common/compat/javax/annotation/processing/Generated.java`,
> > which is dual licensed --- CDDL (Category B) or GPL (Category X).
> > -> For main, it's handled by
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746 , but make
> sure
> > that it's resolved in 10.0.0 build.
> >
> > - `incubator-kie-drools/drools-docs/supplemental-ui/js/search-ui.js`,
> > which is MPL (Category B).
> > -> We will exclude `drools-docs` from the source distribution.
> >
> > However, there may be more cases. We need to scrutinize all source codes
> > to find source codes with licenses missing in the `LICENSE` file.
> >
> > I filed a GH issue for this with the steps to check.
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
> >
> > I have done the check for drools. For other repos, the following PRs
> > are/were fixing license issues.
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130 (Merged)
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes/pull/3714
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/pull/2111
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746
> >
> > I think all these PRs made good progress (might fix all issues), but it
> > would be great if more people review from this point of view.
> >
> > Alex might start rc4 build, so new findings may not be in time for rc4,
> > but it should be good to proceed the work.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Toshiya
> >
>
Re: [HEADS UP] License check
Posted by Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com>.
Thank you very much for the big efforts on those PRs.
I have started reviewing source codes from the "Category X or Category B"
blocker point of view.
I posted my progress as
https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634 comments.
So far, I don't see a blocker in drools, optaplanner, kogito-runtimes (one
suggestion for 10.0.x though).
More eyes would be welcome. Especially kogito-apps and kie-tools, which I
haven't looked at yet.
Cheers,
Toshiya
On Thu, Nov 28, 2024 at 12:03 AM Jozef Marko <Jo...@ibm.com.invalid>
wrote:
> Hello everyone, let me share the status of this topic.
>
> I think currently the initiative has two main parts that are in active
> state:
>
> 1.
> automate the license headers checking in the Apache KIE upstream codebase
> 2.
> ensure the licensing info is correct, mainly in LICENSE and NOTICE files
>
> For both points we have separate tickets:
>
> 1.
> Ticket #1613 [1], where you can see a list of pull request for main and
> 10.0.x branches. these pull requests introduce new github action "Check
> license headers" for each repository
> 2.
> Ticket #1634 [2], where we want to be sure, licensing info we have in
> codebase is correct, and it is not in conflict with the Apache rules
>
> Unfortunately, both points are very related. So the pull requests for the
> point (1. - Ticket #1613) touch also the LICENSE and NOTICE files, that are
> main subject of the point (2. - Ticket #1634)
>
> I am sorry for this. I did my best to split the work as much as possible.
>
> So basically the point (1. - Ticket #1613) is done, we just need reviews
> and merge of created pull request for main and 10.0.x.
>
> From my point of view once such pull request are merged, we can finish the
> point (2. - Ticket #1634).
>
>
> Thank you everyone, who helped me as reviewer on github as support in
> private conversations, ... . Thank you all!
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1613
>
> [2]
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
>
>
> Jozef Marko
>
> Software Developer
>
> jozef.marko@ibm.com
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2024 4:11 AM
> To: dev@kie.apache.org <de...@kie.apache.org>
> Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [HEADS UP] License check
>
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130 (Merged)
>
> for optaplanner, it's good to look at this PR now:
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3144
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 3:55 PM Toshiya Kobayashi <
> toshiyakobayashi@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I think every committer needs to be aware of the requirements, because
> > this topic always matters while we maintain source codes.
> >
> > Per discussion
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/nrq50szwx37doopb23wyq33v0t3bbccg ,
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-469
> > `3rd party Category X or Category B bundled code licenses not listed in
> > LICENSE` is the one major blocker of the 10.0.0 release.
> >
> > It means, if we have Category X or Category B licensed source code, we
> > have to list the file path and its license in the `LICENSE` file at this
> > stage. (Eventually, we will need to remove them before incubator
> graduation)
> >
> > "Category" is explained here: https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
> >
> > In the discussion, 2 cases were highlighted.
> >
> > -
> >
> `./incubator-kie-tools/packages/stunner-editors/errai-common/src/main/java/org/jboss/errai/common/compat/javax/annotation/processing/Generated.java`,
> > which is dual licensed --- CDDL (Category B) or GPL (Category X).
> > -> For main, it's handled by
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746 , but make
> sure
> > that it's resolved in 10.0.0 build.
> >
> > - `incubator-kie-drools/drools-docs/supplemental-ui/js/search-ui.js`,
> > which is MPL (Category B).
> > -> We will exclude `drools-docs` from the source distribution.
> >
> > However, there may be more cases. We need to scrutinize all source codes
> > to find source codes with licenses missing in the `LICENSE` file.
> >
> > I filed a GH issue for this with the steps to check.
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
> >
> > I have done the check for drools. For other repos, the following PRs
> > are/were fixing license issues.
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130 (Merged)
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes/pull/3714
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/pull/2111
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746
> >
> > I think all these PRs made good progress (might fix all issues), but it
> > would be great if more people review from this point of view.
> >
> > Alex might start rc4 build, so new findings may not be in time for rc4,
> > but it should be good to proceed the work.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Toshiya
> >
>
RE: [HEADS UP] License check
Posted by Jozef Marko <Jo...@ibm.com.INVALID>.
Hello everyone, let me share the status of this topic.
I think currently the initiative has two main parts that are in active state:
1.
automate the license headers checking in the Apache KIE upstream codebase
2.
ensure the licensing info is correct, mainly in LICENSE and NOTICE files
For both points we have separate tickets:
1.
Ticket #1613 [1], where you can see a list of pull request for main and 10.0.x branches. these pull requests introduce new github action "Check license headers" for each repository
2.
Ticket #1634 [2], where we want to be sure, licensing info we have in codebase is correct, and it is not in conflict with the Apache rules
Unfortunately, both points are very related. So the pull requests for the point (1. - Ticket #1613) touch also the LICENSE and NOTICE files, that are main subject of the point (2. - Ticket #1634)
I am sorry for this. I did my best to split the work as much as possible.
So basically the point (1. - Ticket #1613) is done, we just need reviews and merge of created pull request for main and 10.0.x.
From my point of view once such pull request are merged, we can finish the point (2. - Ticket #1634).
Thank you everyone, who helped me as reviewer on github as support in private conversations, ... . Thank you all!
[1]
https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1613
[2]
https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
Jozef Marko
Software Developer
jozef.marko@ibm.com
________________________________
From: Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2024 4:11 AM
To: dev@kie.apache.org <de...@kie.apache.org>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [HEADS UP] License check
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130 (Merged)
for optaplanner, it's good to look at this PR now:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3144
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 3:55 PM Toshiya Kobayashi <
toshiyakobayashi@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think every committer needs to be aware of the requirements, because
> this topic always matters while we maintain source codes.
>
> Per discussion
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/nrq50szwx37doopb23wyq33v0t3bbccg ,
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-469
> `3rd party Category X or Category B bundled code licenses not listed in
> LICENSE` is the one major blocker of the 10.0.0 release.
>
> It means, if we have Category X or Category B licensed source code, we
> have to list the file path and its license in the `LICENSE` file at this
> stage. (Eventually, we will need to remove them before incubator graduation)
>
> "Category" is explained here: https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
>
> In the discussion, 2 cases were highlighted.
>
> -
> `./incubator-kie-tools/packages/stunner-editors/errai-common/src/main/java/org/jboss/errai/common/compat/javax/annotation/processing/Generated.java`,
> which is dual licensed --- CDDL (Category B) or GPL (Category X).
> -> For main, it's handled by
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746 , but make sure
> that it's resolved in 10.0.0 build.
>
> - `incubator-kie-drools/drools-docs/supplemental-ui/js/search-ui.js`,
> which is MPL (Category B).
> -> We will exclude `drools-docs` from the source distribution.
>
> However, there may be more cases. We need to scrutinize all source codes
> to find source codes with licenses missing in the `LICENSE` file.
>
> I filed a GH issue for this with the steps to check.
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
>
> I have done the check for drools. For other repos, the following PRs
> are/were fixing license issues.
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130 (Merged)
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes/pull/3714
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/pull/2111
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746
>
> I think all these PRs made good progress (might fix all issues), but it
> would be great if more people review from this point of view.
>
> Alex might start rc4 build, so new findings may not be in time for rc4,
> but it should be good to proceed the work.
>
> Cheers,
> Toshiya
>
Re: [HEADS UP] License check
Posted by Toshiya Kobayashi <to...@gmail.com>.
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130 (Merged)
for optaplanner, it's good to look at this PR now:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3144
On Tue, Nov 26, 2024 at 3:55 PM Toshiya Kobayashi <
toshiyakobayashi@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think every committer needs to be aware of the requirements, because
> this topic always matters while we maintain source codes.
>
> Per discussion
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/nrq50szwx37doopb23wyq33v0t3bbccg ,
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-469
> `3rd party Category X or Category B bundled code licenses not listed in
> LICENSE` is the one major blocker of the 10.0.0 release.
>
> It means, if we have Category X or Category B licensed source code, we
> have to list the file path and its license in the `LICENSE` file at this
> stage. (Eventually, we will need to remove them before incubator graduation)
>
> "Category" is explained here: https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
>
> In the discussion, 2 cases were highlighted.
>
> -
> `./incubator-kie-tools/packages/stunner-editors/errai-common/src/main/java/org/jboss/errai/common/compat/javax/annotation/processing/Generated.java`,
> which is dual licensed --- CDDL (Category B) or GPL (Category X).
> -> For main, it's handled by
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746 , but make sure
> that it's resolved in 10.0.0 build.
>
> - `incubator-kie-drools/drools-docs/supplemental-ui/js/search-ui.js`,
> which is MPL (Category B).
> -> We will exclude `drools-docs` from the source distribution.
>
> However, there may be more cases. We need to scrutinize all source codes
> to find source codes with licenses missing in the `LICENSE` file.
>
> I filed a GH issue for this with the steps to check.
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-issues/issues/1634
>
> I have done the check for drools. For other repos, the following PRs
> are/were fixing license issues.
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-optaplanner/pull/3130 (Merged)
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes/pull/3714
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-kogito-apps/pull/2111
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-kie-tools/pull/2746
>
> I think all these PRs made good progress (might fix all issues), but it
> would be great if more people review from this point of view.
>
> Alex might start rc4 build, so new findings may not be in time for rc4,
> but it should be good to proceed the work.
>
> Cheers,
> Toshiya
>