REUSE June 2021

reuse@lists.fsfe.org

3 participants
4 discussions

REUSE.yaml
by Max Mehl 22 Jun '21

22 Jun '21

Hi all, I am starting a new thread, summarising a wild idea we've had when discussing how to combine the different ideas and expectations that have been raised in the threads regarding folder.license files and the deprecation of the DEP5 file. Our suggestion would be to implement a new file: REUSE.yaml. # Basic concept The purpose would be quite similar to what we already do with DEP5 files [^1]: communicate copyright/licensing information for a whole (sub)directory, or also just a certain pattern, e.g. all .png files in a directory. The first downside of DEP5 is that the tags are different from the normal SPDX/REUSE tags, and that it requires some other meta information out of REUSE's scope. The second downside is that the DEP5 file has to be stored in the .reuse/ folder, quite unintuitive and far away from the actual files. As the name suggests, REUSE.yaml would follow the YAML syntax which is easy to read and write for humans, but it also pretty easy to parse in tools. Another difference would be that there could be multiple REUSE.yaml files. Each one could only define the directory it is stored in, or also subdirectories or certain file patterns. So it can also serve as an alternative to the suggested folder.license files. This would make things easier for devs and reusers alike: given that a repo contains a directory with hundreds of binary files (e.g. images), the maintainers could create a REUSE.yaml file in it. This way, copyright and licensing information is close by, but the maintainers would not have to create $file.license files for every single image, or store the bulk-information in a far-away file. # Syntax Now, if we went that route, we would need a rather fool-proof and easy way how to mark the REUSE information for a directory, subdirectory, or pattern. Here are four variants how to do that in YAML, but only one should be mandated by REUSE in the end: 1. Short Array: ``` - src/*: SPDX-FileCopyrightText: [ "2020 me", "© 2017 you" ] SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT ``` 2. Short List: ``` - src/*: SPDX-FileCopyrightText: - 2020 Me - © 2017 You SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT ``` 3. Short String: ``` - src/*: | SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2020 Me SPDX-FileCopyrightText: © 2017 You SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT ``` 4. Long: ``` - src/*: license: SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT copyright: | SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2020 Me SPDX-FileCopyrightText: © 2017 You ``` Please help us here: what could possibly go wrong with any of these variants? Is there tooling for which you know that it would misbehave? What would make most sense to you as a user? Also, in general, I would be pleased to learn what you think about a REUSE.yaml file that would be a preferred way how to bulk-license files. Best, Max [^1]: See the one of reuse-tool here as an example: https://github.com/fsfe/reuse-tool/blob/master/.reuse/dep5 -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter of software freedom: https://fsfe.org/join

6 14

Please review idea for a modular approach to sources of information
by Nico Rikken 16 Jun '21

16 Jun '21

Hi REUSE community, I've noticed that there are 3 pull requests (PR's) that actually require some restructuring of the code-base before merging. The PR's are somewhat blocked as a consequence. These PR's gather information from the project code and system to fill details like copyright holder, copyright year, maintainer name, maintainer email, etc. This information can come from many sources and can be used in multiple commands (like `init` and `addheader`). So even if we have 2 sources now, it can quickly grow for all types of version control systems (git, mercurial) and project definition files (pyproject.toml, package.json, etc.). Two PR's are already in conflict, so we need a proper solution sooner rather than later. I took the time to write down my ideas in an issue comment, hoping to further this discussion and create the space for the outstanding contributions: https://github.com/fsfe/reuse-tool/issues/68#issuecomment-859763098 I hope you can take a look and reply in the GitHub issue thread with your opinions, concerns and suggestions. Best, Nico Rikken

2 1

Unable to complete registration for REUSE Booster
by Minyong (Bill) Li 10 Jun '21

10 Jun '21

Hi all, I happened to come across reuse.software on 9 June and discovered this great activity. I tried to register, but when visiting the confirmation link I can only get a 404 Not Found page saying "No such pending confirmation ID". My first trial has NoScript enabled so I tried twice this morning with NoScript globally disabled, but still I can only get a 404. I use a Firefox 88.0.1 on Linux. Could you please take a look into it? Best Regards, Minyong (Bill) Li Electronics and Computer Science University of Southampton

2 2

Announcing REUSE Booster to support projects
by Max Mehl 09 Jun '21

09 Jun '21

Hi all, As you know, adopting the REUSE best practices is no rocket science, even for non-legals and hobbyists. Still, some Free Software communities wanted to get some extra help and guidance. Today, we launch REUSE Booster as a program to facilitate this! https://reuse.software/booster Projects can register themselves to receive some help by the FSFE's legal experts. Thanks to our involvement in the NGI project, we have vast experience with providing this support. Registration is open until 8 July EOD. So if you represent projects that would like to get a helping hand with adopting REUSE or know some, please register and spread the word! Best, Max -- Max Mehl - Programme Manager - Free Software Foundation Europe Contact and information: https://fsfe.org/about/mehl | @mxmehl Become a supporter of software freedom: https://fsfe.org/join

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

REUSE June 2021