fsfe / reuse-docs

REUSE recommendations, tutorials, FAQ and specification

Home Page:https://reuse.software

Geek Repo:Geek Repo

Github PK Tool:Github PK Tool

How to classify proprietary files

niccokunzmann opened this issue · comments

I have some files in my repository that I test against that are not FOSS. How can I correctly tell REUSE that that is the case?

At the moment, I have created a license that is not ok and added it to the file.

$ reuse lint

# BAD LICENSES

'AI-SPEC' found in:
* LICENSES/AI-SPEC.txt
* tests/data/grammar/header_specification_page_15.txt


# SUMMARY

* Bad licenses: AI-SPEC
* Deprecated licenses:
* Licenses without file extension:
* Missing licenses:
* Unused licenses:
* Used licenses: AI-SPEC, GPL-2.0-or-later
* Read errors: 0
* Files with copyright information: 51 / 51
* Files with license information: 51 / 51

Unfortunately, your project is not compliant with version 3.0 of the REUSE Specification :-(

Do I ignore that file? I would like a proper return code 0 for lint so I can use it in CI.

So, I am looking at this: https://reuse.software/faq/#custom-license

Ok. I found it. I need to prefix it with LicenseRef-. That is not really clear there.

# SUMMARY

* Bad licenses:
* Deprecated licenses:
* Licenses without file extension:
* Missing licenses:
* Unused licenses:
* Used licenses: GPL-2.0-or-later, LicenseRef-AI-SPEC
* Read errors: 0
* Files with copyright information: 51 / 51
* Files with license information: 51 / 51

Congratulations! Your project is compliant with version 3.0 of the REUSE Specification :-)

Two issues:

  • The BAD LICENSES Section should generate a link and explanation on how to create custom licenses.
  • #126

You solved it the right way. Thanks for providing the two tasks.

  • The BAD LICENSES Section should generate a link and explanation on how to create custom licenses.

For this, we have fsfe/reuse-tool#698. For the bad license, there is a link to the said FAQ item.

  • The website (tutorial and FAQ) should have a link to their source.

That's a good point. I will create a separate issue, and close this one.