Relicense from LGPL-3 to BSD-3#2285
Conversation
|
There is already a fair amount of variability in the time it takes for the tests to run: Of course this does open us to the risk of the url we use to download being occasionally slow (or not available) but I suspect there are other parts of Cartopy's testing that requires download |
|
Is it deliberate that the LICENSE file says Copyright Met Office but the python file headers say Copyright Cartopy Contributors? |
greglucas
left a comment
greglucas
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd have a slight preference for removing all of the licensing in every file rather than updating it with the new information. Is that an option? It looks like Iris has it in every file too, so if that is required no problem either.
Then we could get rid of the coding standards license test which was not even being run on CI previously: #2278
lbdreyer
left a comment
lbdreyer
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it deliberate that the LICENSE file says Copyright Met Office but the python file headers say Copyright Cartopy Contributors?
I checked this with the legal team and their recommendation was to include both, i.e. Crown and Cartopy contributors in each copyright reference. So I have updated all of these.
This is a new license, so does the copyright year also need to be update
The year in the copyright notice states the year that the work was first published so this would remain 2012. However, it is not a legal requirement to include it so I have removed it from the copyright notices. We have previously done something similar with the license headers
I'd have a slight preference for removing all of the licensing in every file rather than updating it with the new information. Is that an option?
I'm afraid the legal team recommend we keep these headers
|
This would probably be good to have someone from the Met Office merge in. I think it is good to go, but it would be good to have someone else from the Met Office verify/approve this kind of a change. |
Happy to take a look in early January. I've only got a couple of pre-Xmas hours left and I wouldn't want to get trigger happy on something unfamiliar! |
Co-authored-by: Greg Lucas <greg.m.lucas@gmail.com>
…state bsd 3-clause where possible
|
@trexfeathers I have just rebased to resolve the merge conflicts |
|
The new failures appear to be affecting any CI that is run. I just tried re-running a job from another PR (link) and the errors came up there too, having not been there before. This all points to something upstream in a dependency. |
|
Test failures need geopython/OWSLib#769 I think ☹ |
trexfeathers
left a comment
trexfeathers
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I note from #2317 that we are happy merging despite the frustrating OWSlib failures, which seems fair to me.
That was the only thing stopping me, so consider Cartopy BSD-3 licensed ✅
|
Thank you for merging @trexfeathers ! |
## Overview This PR fixes #494 Changes: * Upgraded Cartopy to v0.23.0 (BSD License) * Added `yamllint` and `isort` to development deps and to linting * Dropped support for Python3.8 ## Additional Information SciTools/cartopy#2285
6 participants
Closes #2134
It has now passed the deadline set in #2134, so we can go ahead with relicensing.
This PR removes all mentions of LGPL and replace it with BSD.
Notably I have had to remove the GSHHS shapefiles that were included in cartopy as these are licensed as LGPL (according to this comment:
cartopy/lib/cartopy/data/LICENSE
Line 5 in 0d58449
So if we kept the files, the whole project would need to be kept as LGPL.
The files were initially included in this commit: 9fc50a1. They were included to speed up the tests. I will let the tests run to see if the slowdown is significant enough to consider looking at other options.