GNU bug report logs - #76932
Missing or ambiguous license headers in several files

Previous Next

To reply to this bug, email your comments to 76932 AT debbugs.gnu.org.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant <at> debian.org>
To: bug-guix <at> gnu.org
Cc: Daniel Meißner <daniel.meissner-i4k <at> ruhr-uni-bochum.de>,
 Adam Kandur <kefironpremise <at> gmail.com>,
 Sharlatan Hellseher <sharlatanus <at> gmail.com>, Adam Faiz <adam.faiz <at> disroot.org>,
 Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>, Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz>,
 Raven Hallsby <karl <at> hallsby.com>, Julien Lepiller <julien <at> lepiller.eu>,
 Morgan Smith <Morgan.J.Smith <at> outlook.com>
Subject: Missing or ambiguous license headers in several files
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2025 23:27:00 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

These files contain no license headers, and in some cases, no copyright
holders. Folds who either ddeclared copyright in these files or
otherwise mentioned in the licensing headers are CCed.

  doc/package-hello.scm

Arguably, maybe not really sufficiently creative to qualify for
copyright...


 gnu/packages/aux-files/findclass.php
 * Composer (and thus this file) is distributed under the expat license, and
 * ClassMapGenerator.php also contains this notice:
 *
 *   This file is part of Composer.
 *
 *   (c) Nils Adermann <naderman <at> naderman.de>
 *       Jordi Boggiano <j.boggiano <at> seld.be>
 *
 *   For the full copyright and license information, please view the LICENSE
 *   file that was distributed with this source code.
 *
 *   This file is copied from the Symfony package.
 *
 *   (c) Fabien Potencier <fabien <at> symfony.com>
 * 
 * To the extent to wich it makes sense, as the author of the extract:
 * Copyright © 2020 Julien Lepiller <julien <at> lepiller.eu>

The LICENSE file is not present ... so what is the exact text of the
"expat" license, as there are many permutations in the wild?


  gnu/packages/dotnet.scm

Neither copyright nor license delcaration.


  gnu/packages/power.scm

No license declaration, copyright by from Raven Hallsby
<karl <at> hallsby.com> and Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz>.


 gnu/packages/python-graphics.scm

Again, no license declaration, but a list of copyright holders including
Adam Kandur <kefironpremise <at> gmail.com>, Daniel Meißner
<daniel.meissner-i4k <at> ruhr-uni-bochum.de>, Morgan Smith
<Morgan.J.Smith <at> outlook.com>, Adam Faiz <adam.faiz <at> disroot.org>, Simon
Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>, and Sharlatan Hellseher
<sharlatanus <at> gmail.com>.


live well,
  vagrant

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #8 received at 76932 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Sharlatan Hellseher <sharlatanus <at> gmail.com>
To: 76932 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant <at> debian.org>
Subject: Missing or ambiguous license headers in several files
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 09:34:17 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Vagrant,

>  gnu/packages/python-graphics.scm
> 
> Again, no license declaration, but a list of copyright holders including
> Adam Kandur <kefironpremise <at> gmail.com>, Daniel Meißner
> <daniel.meissner-i4k <at> ruhr-uni-bochum.de>, Morgan Smith
> <Morgan.J.Smith <at> outlook.com>, Adam Faiz <adam.faiz <at> disroot.org>, Simon
> Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>, and Sharlatan Hellseher
> <sharlatanus <at> gmail.com>.

May you clarify what exactly do you mean under "no license declaration"?

I see this in the used modules:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(define-module (gnu packages python-graphics)
  #:use-module ((guix licenses) #:prefix license:)
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

and 

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> grep license gnu/packages/python-graphics.scm
  #:use-module ((guix licenses) #:prefix license:)
      (license license:expat))))
    (license license:expat)))
    (license license:bsd-3)))
    (license license:bsd-3)))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

Licenses are defined in "guix/licenses.scm"

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(define bsd-3
  (license "Modified BSD"
           "http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:BSD_3Clause"
           "https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list#ModifiedBSD"))

;; Some people call it the MIT license. For clarification see:
;; https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#Expat
(define expat
  (license "Expat"
           "http://directory.fsf.org/wiki/License:Expat"
           "https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#Expat"))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

And each package has a valid license in the definition, or maybe it's
something else?

I've initiated python-graphics (similar to crates.graphics and
java-graphics) module to collect and move anything which requires messa
or similar low level bindings for Python. There a lot in python-xyz
which would be moved in this module.

--
Oleg

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #11 received at 76932 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Vagrant Cascadian <vagrant <at> debian.org>
To: Sharlatan Hellseher <sharlatanus <at> gmail.com>, 76932 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Missing or ambiguous license headers in several files
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 11:38:53 -0700

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 2025-03-11, Sharlatan Hellseher wrote:
>>  gnu/packages/python-graphics.scm
>> 
>> Again, no license declaration, but a list of copyright holders including
>> Adam Kandur <kefironpremise <at> gmail.com>, Daniel Meißner
>> <daniel.meissner-i4k <at> ruhr-uni-bochum.de>, Morgan Smith
>> <Morgan.J.Smith <at> outlook.com>, Adam Faiz <adam.faiz <at> disroot.org>, Simon
>> Tournier <zimon.toutoune <at> gmail.com>, and Sharlatan Hellseher
>> <sharlatanus <at> gmail.com>.
>
> May you clarify what exactly do you mean under "no license declaration"?
...
>> grep license gnu/packages/python-graphics.scm
>   #:use-module ((guix licenses) #:prefix license:)
>       (license license:expat))))
>     (license license:expat)))
>     (license license:bsd-3)))
>     (license license:bsd-3)))
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
...
> And each package has a valid license in the definition, or maybe it's
> something else?

Something else indeed!

While each package has a proper (license) listed, the file
"gnu/packages/python-graphics.scm" contains no license declaration for
itself.

Every package definiton in guix is guile code that requires a license in
order to be able to use, study, modify and share that has it's own
license independent of the license of the resulting package it produces.


Most files in guix gnu/packages/*.scm contain a header such as:

;;; This file is part of GNU Guix.
;;;
;;; GNU Guix is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
;;; under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
;;; the Free Software Foundation; either version 3 of the License, or (at
;;; your option) any later version.
;;;
;;; GNU Guix is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
;;; WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
;;; MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
;;; GNU General Public License for more details.
;;;
;;; You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
;;; along with GNU Guix.  If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.

It may seem a bit excessive and verbose to include it in each and every
file, but it is to my understanding, considered best practice, at least
within GNU projects (and also the GPL itself recommends this), to
include the above or equivalent in each file to make it absolutely
clear.

One of the hardest things to track is when some code was grabbed from
some random other project and it refers to a non-existent COPYING or
LICENSING file in project it foind a new home in. Keeping the headers in
the file generally helps with that.


> I've initiated python-graphics (similar to crates.graphics and
> java-graphics) module to collect and move anything which requires messa
> or similar low level bindings for Python. There a lot in python-xyz
> which would be moved in this module.

If you are copying package definitions from other existing modules with
the above licensing declaration, then the licensing headers for the file
itself definitely should also be copied. :)


Hope that clarifies what I am getting at!


live well,
  vagrant

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #14 received at 76932 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Sharlatan Hellseher <sharlatanus <at> gmail.com>
To: 76932 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Missing or ambiguous license headers in several files
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2025 22:47:58 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi,

I've added missing license header for packages/python-graphics in 

1b7fb5e3f9 * gnu: packages/python-graphics: Add missing license file header.

--
Oleg

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.