docs: correct NOTICE attribution#119
Conversation
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe ChangesCopyright Attribution Split
Possibly Related PRs
Estimated code review effort🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes Poem
🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings. ✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
PR Summary by QodoAlign NOTICE with Apache License 2.0 appendix notice form Description
High-Level Assessment
Files changed (1)
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request updates the NOTICE file to separate the copyright attributions for Bob T. and the json-logging contributors, and adds the Apache License, Version 2.0 text. There are no review comments, and I have no feedback to provide.
Important
The consumer version of Gemini Code Assist on GitHub is being sunset. Starting June 18, 2026, new organization installations will be blocked, and all code review activity will officially cease on July 17, 2026.
For more details on the timeline and next steps, please review the Help Documentation.
Code Review by Qodo🐞 Bugs (0) 📘 Rule violations (0) 📎 Requirement gaps (0)
Great, no issues found!Qodo reviewed your code and found no material issues that require reviewⓘ You are approaching your monthly quota for Qodo. Upgrade your plan |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Auto Pull Request Review from LlamaPReview
Review Status: Automated Review Skipped
Dear contributor,
Thank you for your Pull Request. LlamaPReview has analyzed your changes and determined that this PR does not require an automated code review.
Analysis Result:
PR contains only documentation updates (NOTICE file) and no substantive code changes, requiring no automated code review
We're continuously improving our PR analysis capabilities. Have thoughts on when and how LlamaPReview should perform automated reviews? Share your insights in our GitHub Discussions.
Best regards,
LlamaPReview Team
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@NOTICE`:
- Around line 6-16: The NOTICE file currently contains the full Apache License
2.0 boilerplate text which should only appear in a separate LICENSE file. Remove
the Apache license header and boilerplate content from the NOTICE file, keeping
only any attribution notices that are specific to third-party components or
dependencies. The NOTICE file should contain only attribution information, not
the full license text.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
| Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); | ||
| you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. | ||
| You may obtain a copy of the License at | ||
|
|
||
| http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 | ||
|
|
||
| Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software | ||
| distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, | ||
| WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. | ||
| See the License for the specific language governing permissions and | ||
| limitations under the License. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Move the Apache boilerplate out of NOTICE.
Apache guidance puts the full 2.0 license text in LICENSE; NOTICE is for attribution notices and is informational only. Leaving the boilerplate here makes the NOTICE file non-standard and can confuse packaging. (apache.org)
Suggested fix
Copyright 2017 Bob T.
Copyright 2017 json-logging contributors
-
-Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
-you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
-You may obtain a copy of the License at
-
- http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
-
-Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
-distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
-WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
-See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
-limitations under the License.🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In `@NOTICE` around lines 6 - 16, The NOTICE file currently contains the full
Apache License 2.0 boilerplate text which should only appear in a separate
LICENSE file. Remove the Apache license header and boilerplate content from the
NOTICE file, keeping only any attribution notices that are specific to
third-party components or dependencies. The NOTICE file should contain only
attribution information, not the full license text.
0b45f8b to
334e837
Compare
|
This PR was opened by a bot, I don't find another explanation. See my PR #118 instead that contains the boilerplate. |
Summary
Follow-up to #117.
Refs #93.
Verification
/tmp/json-logging-python-venv-followup/bin/python setup.py check -m -s/tmp/json-logging-python-venv-followup/bin/python -m pytest --ignore tests/smoketests(23 passed)/tmp/json-logging-python-venv-followup/bin/python setup.py sdist --dist-dir /tmp/json-logging-python-sdist-followupandtar -tzf /tmp/json-logging-python-sdist-followup/json_logging-1.5.1.tar.gz | grep '/NOTICE$'/tmp/json-logging-python-venv-followup/bin/python -m flake8 . --count --select=E9,F63,F7,F82 --show-source --statisticsreturned0Notes
LICENSE.Summary by CodeRabbit