License badge colour corresponding to license type #1190

platan · 2017-10-20T17:23:36Z

Implementation of #1093.

Listing of all licenses (https://developer.github.com/v3/licenses/#list-all-licenses) returns 12 licenses:

curl "https://api.github.com/licenses" -s -H "Accept:  application/vnd.github.drax-preview+json" | jq ".[].spdx_id" -r
BSD-3-Clause
EPL-1.0
Apache-2.0
LGPL-2.1
LGPL-3.0
Unlicense
AGPL-3.0
MIT
BSD-2-Clause
MPL-2.0
GPL-2.0
GPL-3.0

but when we use advances search https://github.com/search/advanced there is more of them

API returns info about this extra license:

curl "https://api.github.com/repos/glfw/glfw/license" -s -H "Accept:  application/vnd.github.drax-preview+json" | jq ".license.spdx_id"
"Zlib"

I do not have service tests for colours, cause json resource does not return colour :-( Should we add colour to json resource in order to test them?

TODO:

add support for all licenses recognised by GitHub
rename viral to copyleft
decide if we want do separate copyleft and viral licenses
decide what to with long license names (use SPDX or key is instead of name or create separate license with short name)
apply colors to NPM license badge
use unknown label for GitHub Other license
decide how to test colors (currently separate JSON style, compatible with default)
make permissive a duller version of public domain

platan · 2017-10-20T20:31:39Z

List of all licenses (spdx_id, name). I have to categorize them and put in config file.
AFL-3.0 - Academic Free License v3.0
AGPL-3.0 - GNU Affero General Public License v3.0
Apache-2.0 - Apache License 2.0
Artistic-2.0 - Artistic License 2.0
BSD-2-Clause - BSD 2-clause "Simplified" License
BSD-3-Clause - BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License
BSD-3-Clause-Clear - BSD 3-clause Clear License
BSL-1.0 - Boost Software License 1.0
CC-BY-4.0 - Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
CC-BY-SA-4.0 - Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 4.0
CC0-1.0 - Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
ECL-2.0 - Educational Community License v2.0
EPL-1.0 - Eclipse Public License 1.0
EUPL-1.1 - European Union Public License 1.1
GPL-2.0 - GNU General Public License v2.0
GPL-3.0 - GNU General Public License v3.0
ISC - ISC License
LGPL-2.1 - GNU Lesser General Public License v2.1
LGPL-3.0 - GNU Lesser General Public License v3.0
LPPL-1.3c - LaTeX Project Public License v1.3c
MIT - MIT License
MPL-2.0 - Mozilla Public License 2.0
MS-PL - Microsoft Public License
MS-RL - Microsoft Reciprocal License
NCSA - University of Illinois/NCSA Open Source License
OFL-1.1 - SIL Open Font License 1.1
OSL-3.0 - Open Software License 3.0
PostgreSQL - PostgreSQL License
Unlicense - The Unlicense
WTFPL - Do What The F*ck You Want To Public License
Zlib - zlib License

paulmelnikow

Looks great!

paulmelnikow · 2017-10-21T15:56:14Z

lib/licenses.js

+    acc[licenseName] = licenses[licenseType].color;
+    return acc;
+  }, licenseToColor);
+});


Could you export a function instead? It makes it a bit easier to handle errors, and you could also use it to handle default values, as in some of the functions in lib/badge-data.js.

I've exported licenseToColor as a function.

paulmelnikow · 2017-10-21T16:01:26Z

lib/licenses.js

+  licenses[licenseType].licenses.reduce((acc, licenseName) => {
+    acc[licenseName] = licenses[licenseType].color;
+    return acc;
+  }, licenseToColor);


Would this be clearer?

Object.keys(licenseTypes).forEach(licenseType => { const { licenses, color } = licenseTypes[licenseType]; licenses.forEach(license => { licenseToColor[license] = color; }); });

It would be :-) I've change the code.

paulmelnikow · 2017-10-21T16:01:37Z

lib/licenses.spec.js

+
+describe('licenseToColor', function () {
+  it('should has entry for known license', function () {
+    assert.equal(licenseToColor['MIT'], 'blue');


paulmelnikow · 2017-10-21T16:04:02Z

lib/licenses.js

+'use strict';
+const licenses = {
+  'permissive': {
+    licenses: ['MIT', 'Apache-2.0', 'BSD-3-Clause', 'BSD-2-Clause'],


Are these SPDX IDs or are they github-specific?

These are SPDX ids. Rename licenses to spxdLicenseIds?

paulmelnikow · 2017-10-21T16:05:07Z

I noticed this is only change one of the many license badges. Any thoughts about whether any of the others should be updated?

KOLANICH · 2017-10-22T20:49:14Z

I guess you can use tldrlegal API and check must for Disclose Source.
https://tldrlegal.com/api/license/ here is the api root
https://tldrlegal.com/api/license/52c863569f62d5643500000c here is gplv3
52c863569f62d5643500000c is the identifier, you can see it in api root
it's not hard to write a library interacting with the api

platan · 2017-10-23T19:31:04Z

I've added all licenses supported by GitHub to lib/licenses.js. Could someone please review assignment to specific groups? https://choosealicense.com/appendix/ can be helpful.

platan · 2017-10-23T19:36:44Z

@KOLANICH so you want to get license details from tldrlegal API in order to categorize them into one of the three groups (permissive, viral and public domain)? I thought config like lib/license.js will be sufficient.

KOLANICH · 2017-10-23T19:42:13Z

@KOLANICH so you want to get license details from tldrlegal API in order to categorize them into one of the three groups (permissive, viral and public domain)? I thought config like lib/license.js will be sufficient.

You will have to update the config manually when new licences appear. I think it's better to have a script rebuilding the "config" (in fact it is used as a database) automatically on schedule.

platan · 2017-10-23T19:53:20Z

platan · 2017-10-26T19:01:06Z

On the one hand it is a good idea to load licenses details from. On the other hand this 31 licenses from Github could cover most of the licenses (compare with some licenses distribution stats https://www.whitesourcesoftware.com/whitesource-blog/open-source-software-licenses-trends/, https://www.blackducksoftware.com/top-open-source-licenses).
Unfortunately haven't found SPDX identifiers in https://tldrlegal.com API (sometimes SPDX full name or SPDX id is a part of the title value).
GitHub API seems to be a good alternative as a source of license details (we can pass SPDX id as a license id):

curl "https://api.github.com/licenses/Apache-2.0" -H "Accept: application/vnd.github.drax-preview+json" -s | jq 'del(.body)'        
{
  "key": "apache-2.0",
  "name": "Apache License 2.0",
  "spdx_id": "Apache-2.0",
  "url": "https://api.github.com/licenses/apache-2.0",
  "featured": true,
  "html_url": "http://choosealicense.com/licenses/apache-2.0/",
  "description": "A permissive license whose main conditions require preservation of copyright and license notices. Contributors provide an express grant of patent rights. Licensed works, modifications, and larger works may be distributed under different terms and without source code.",
  "implementation": "Create a text file (typically named LICENSE or LICENSE.txt) in the root of your source code and copy the text of the license into the file.",
  "permissions": [
    "commercial-use",
    "modifications",
    "distribution",
    "patent-use",
    "private-use"
  ],
  "conditions": [
    "include-copyright",
    "document-changes"
  ],
  "limitations": [
    "trademark-use",
    "liability",
    "warranty"
  ]
}

platan · 2017-10-26T19:19:54Z

I prepared more examples with badges.

Crates.io
Packagist
NPM
PyPI
Hex.pm
CocoaPods
Bower
APM
CPAN
CRAN
CTAN
DUB
AUR

Almost all of them have license name, which does not match SPDX identifier. To handle all this services maybe we will need to prepare some mapping of names or license recognition.

KOLANICH · 2017-10-26T21:15:53Z

Unfortunately haven't found SPDX identifiers in https://tldrlegal.com API

shorthand in a license summary?

paulmelnikow · 2017-10-27T15:48:20Z

@KOLANICH if you're passionate about automatically generating the license data, how about publishing an npm package with that data in it? Then we could rework this to use that data.

I'm not sure tldrlegal is the best source of data to use. That API is "temporary", and you may need their permission to publish their data. I found this folder of data from Github's choosealicense.com project, which I think is under CC-BY. Maybe that would be a good source.

platan · 2017-10-27T16:09:41Z

@KOLANICH Open Software License 3.0 (OSL-3.0) in tldrlegal.com does not have shorthand (https://tldrlegal.com/api/license/539a8b2fb8c2c0604500013e) or shorthand is different than SPDX id (boost for Boost Software License 1.0 instead of BSL-1.0 https://tldrlegal.com/api/license/52e58a3281519e003b000094)

paulmelnikow · 2017-10-27T16:14:35Z

Thanks for collecting those license badges. The only one of those registries that I know uses SPDX IDs is npm. It's worth enabling this code for that badge. They do support SPDX expressions which I just used for the first time. I don't encounter them very often though. You could write some code to handle them, or just display in gray as unrecognized.

License string parsing is a can of worms! I'm game to attempt it but would probably want to take that seriously, collecting lots of example strings from each repository and making sure we're doing a good job detecting them + labeling them correctly. I'm not sure it feels worth it for just the color, though do think a "convert license to SPDX" could be generally useful. Maybe we could even convince some of these repositories – or projects – to publish the SPDX id! Well, that's a grand vision… if you want to work on that I'd be game to help, though probably we should make a separate repo.

paulmelnikow · 2017-10-27T16:16:23Z

lib/licenses.js

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+'use strict';
+const licenseTypes = {
+  'permissive': {


Could you explain how these were derived from https://choosealicense.com/appendix/, and give attribution? I think that content is licensed CC-BY. It would also make it easier to check your work, as you requested!

'public-domain' licenses are those that do not require 'license and copyright notice', 'viral' - requires 'disclose source' or 'same license', rest is 'permissive'. Does it answer your question?

Yea, great! Could you add this in a comment? I feel like that'll be helpful to others in the future.

KOLANICH · 2017-10-27T19:37:34Z

@KOLANICH if you're passionate about automatically generating the license data, how about publishing an npm package with that data in it? Then we could rework this to use that data.

I'm not going to do that. I don't use node and npm and I don't understand and strictly against of all this hype of using npm even for projects not involving Node, such as webpages, libraries not specific to node and extensions for browsers.

I'm not sure tldrlegal is the best source of data to use.

Neither do I.

That API is "temporary"

It has been "temporary" for more than 4 years. We in Russia have a proverb "there is nothing more permanent than temporary one".

you may need their permission to publish their data.

It is the main problem here. I guess you should contact them and ask. Since there are links to json from the pages of licenses on tldrlegal (in the bottom), I guess that the chances are high to get the permission.

I found this folder of data from Github's choosealicense.com project, which I think is under CC-BY.

That should be a good source. I guess we need a separate repo with json files.

@KOLANICH Open Software License 3.0 (OSL-3.0) in tldrlegal.com does not have shorthand (https://tldrlegal.com/api/license/539a8b2fb8c2c0604500013e) or shorthand is different than SPDX id (boost for Boost Software License 1.0 instead of BSL-1.0 https://tldrlegal.com/api/license/52e58a3281519e003b000094)

Then tldrlegal doesn't suit our needs well, for now.

paulmelnikow · 2017-10-28T15:27:55Z

I was thinking a bit more about the meaning behind the colors.

Some people love copyleft licenses and think they are the best. Others see them and think, danger! Ideally, we should choose a color for copyleft that works for both schools of thought, conveying both "awesome!" and "danger!". Since we're asking people to put these badges on their own projects, it's important people can relate to the color. (Otherwise they will probably just override it.)

Also, since many projects have license badges with our blue color, it might be better to choose something else for permissive.

What do you think about these?

KOLANICH · 2017-10-28T18:38:54Z

Ideally, we should choose a color for copyleft that works for both schools of thought, conveying both "awesome!" and "danger!".

Orange looks nice, but gray for unknown doesn't, because unknown may be proprietary, so unknown is danger, and more danger than viral. And explicitly or implicitly (missing license) proprietary is more dangerous than unknown.

Also, since many projects have license badges with our blue color, it might be better to choose something else for permissive.

In fact most of templates of licence shields are blue. I guess it is because it is one of the colors having no success/failure meaning. In fact I thought about something like #3FF8CC for permissive and something like #00FF00 for public domain.

paulmelnikow · 2017-11-09T22:01:46Z

@platan I would love to get this merged. When you have a moment, could you take a look at my last round of comments?

platan · 2017-11-11T09:27:49Z

I will continue work on this next week.

paulmelnikow · 2017-11-30T19:28:30Z

Could you merge in master? Would love to get this landed! Thanks for your patience.

paulmelnikow · 2017-11-30T19:31:57Z

service-tests/github.js

+
+t.create('Public domain license')
+  .get('/license/badges/shields.json?style=_shields_test')
+  .expectJSON({ name: 'license', value: 'CC0-1.0', colorB: '#7cd958' });


Since licenseToColor has its own unit tests, how about doing something like:

const permissiveLicenseColor = licenseToColor('CC0-1.0');

That way if we change the color, this test won't require new maintenance.

Looks like this is pending.

Done. I had to stop work on this suddenly. Thanks!

paulmelnikow · 2017-12-02T16:34:25Z

lib/badge-data.spec.js

+    given({}, 'f00f00').expect({ colorB: '#f00f00' });
+    given({ colorB: '#f00f00', colorscheme: 'blue' }, 'red').expect({ colorscheme: 'red' });
+    given({ colorB: '#b00b00', colorscheme: 'blue' }, 'f00f00').expect({ colorB: '#f00f00' });
+  });


paulmelnikow · 2017-12-02T16:35:05Z

service-tests/github.js

+
+t.create('Public domain license')
+  .get('/license/badges/shields.json?style=_shields_test')
+  .expectJSON({ name: 'license', value: 'CC0-1.0', colorB: '#7cd958' });


Looks like this is pending.

platan · 2017-12-03T18:26:24Z

I think everything is fixed. To sum up, we have such license badges (GitHub):

paulmelnikow · 2017-12-03T20:38:54Z

I ran the service tests locally. There are a slough of failures, though most of them are unrelated.

There are related failures in the GitHub service tests, which are returning license | missing. Could you take a look?

…e != 200

platan · 2017-12-05T21:09:36Z

You probably exceeded GitHub API rate limit. In this case you get "missing" as a license value. I've changed this to "inaccessible" (for this and other cases when HTTP status code is not 200). I've added a service test for this case as well.

edit:
test results: https://travis-ci.org/platan/shields/jobs/312080812#L3740

paulmelnikow · 2017-12-05T21:42:08Z

Huh, I'd be surprised if it were rate limit, since I have a token set up in development (5k/hr). Nevertheless, they are passing now! And thanks for the improved erroring!

platan · 2017-12-05T21:59:44Z

I was a really long PR :-). @KOLANICH @paulmelnikow and @tooomm thanks for ideas, reviews and your time!

KOLANICH · 2017-12-05T22:22:21Z

👏 🎉

tooomm · 2017-12-05T22:27:25Z

It was. Well done @platan! And thanks...

paulmelnikow · 2017-12-05T22:34:05Z

Yes, I was thinking the same thing. Well done! Looking forward to getting this shipped so we can start hearing feedback about it.

Was thinking we might want to document an explanation of the colors somewhere on the website. Could be in an example, or else at the bottom of the page.

Should be live on staging, at any rate: https://shields-staging.herokuapp.com/

tooomm · 2017-12-05T22:38:34Z

Indeed, some documentation would be very helpful here!

I would prefer it inside every license badge preview it applies to.
Like for the GitHub rate limits, see #1311 (comment). There has been some talks and a nice approach of some documentation in there for the recent appveyor badge pr (#1321).
I'm not a fan of a badge specific documentation at the bottom.

Edit: Actually there is some more heavy documentation within the badge preview for Visual Studio Team services!

platan added 5 commits October 20, 2017 18:53

License badge color corresponding to license type

83f2839

Missing 'use strict' added

6387941

Code refactoring

ce1d270

Code refactoring

d457ac0

Using Object.keys instead of Object.values in node 6

bfd2f58

paulmelnikow added core Server, BaseService, GitHub auth, Shared helpers service-badge New or updated service badge labels Oct 21, 2017

paulmelnikow reviewed Oct 21, 2017

View reviewed changes

platan added 2 commits October 22, 2017 20:47

Code refactoring

85a970f

licenseToColor as a function

77b3817

All licences supported by GitHub in licenses.js

5c93119

paulmelnikow reviewed Oct 27, 2017

View reviewed changes

Zlib added to licenses list

efd5324

Typo fix

9de0781

service-tests for website

4788de3

platan added 4 commits November 15, 2017 20:37

'missing' or 'package not found' as a npm license text

0aa8074

GitHub license badge for unknown repo

d1b6744

Colorful NPM license badge

1f21807

licenseToColor tests migrated to sazerac

3ea8110

paulmelnikow reviewed Nov 30, 2017

View reviewed changes

platan added 3 commits December 2, 2017 09:39

Merge branch 'master' into colorful-licenses

4998763

Merge branch 'master' into colorful-licenses

d8bf9ff

setBadgeColor resets colorB or colorscheme

2532d41

paulmelnikow reviewed Dec 2, 2017

View reviewed changes

Using licenseToColor in GitHub service tests

20f4835

espadrine force-pushed the master branch from 203d6d5 to 7e668c7 Compare December 3, 2017 18:06

License:inaccessible when GitHub API returns response with status cod…

edba926

…e != 200

paulmelnikow merged commit 0570a9e into badges:master Dec 5, 2017

paulmelnikow mentioned this pull request Dec 5, 2017

Fix style picker in markup modal #1331

Merged

chris48s mentioned this pull request Feb 10, 2018

[chocolatey powershellgallery] add service tests for NuGet v2 services #1487

Merged

paulmelnikow mentioned this pull request Mar 19, 2018

Better license shields #1093

Closed

chris48s mentioned this pull request Apr 13, 2024

Consider recoloring CC0 license and adding 0BSD #10058

Closed

License badge colour corresponding to license type #1190

License badge colour corresponding to license type #1190

Conversation

platan commented Oct 20, 2017 • edited Loading

platan commented Oct 20, 2017

paulmelnikow left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

paulmelnikow commented Oct 21, 2017

KOLANICH commented Oct 22, 2017 • edited Loading

platan commented Oct 23, 2017

platan commented Oct 23, 2017

KOLANICH commented Oct 23, 2017 • edited Loading

platan commented Oct 23, 2017

platan commented Oct 26, 2017

platan commented Oct 26, 2017

KOLANICH commented Oct 26, 2017 • edited Loading

paulmelnikow commented Oct 27, 2017

platan commented Oct 27, 2017

paulmelnikow commented Oct 27, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

KOLANICH commented Oct 27, 2017 • edited Loading

paulmelnikow commented Oct 28, 2017

KOLANICH commented Oct 28, 2017 • edited Loading

paulmelnikow commented Nov 9, 2017

platan commented Nov 11, 2017

paulmelnikow commented Nov 30, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

platan commented Dec 3, 2017

paulmelnikow commented Dec 3, 2017

platan commented Dec 5, 2017 • edited Loading

paulmelnikow commented Dec 5, 2017

platan commented Dec 5, 2017

KOLANICH commented Dec 5, 2017

tooomm commented Dec 5, 2017

paulmelnikow commented Dec 5, 2017

tooomm commented Dec 5, 2017 • edited Loading

platan commented Oct 20, 2017 •

edited

Loading

KOLANICH commented Oct 22, 2017 •

edited

Loading

KOLANICH commented Oct 23, 2017 •

edited

Loading

KOLANICH commented Oct 26, 2017 •

edited

Loading

KOLANICH commented Oct 27, 2017 •

edited

Loading

KOLANICH commented Oct 28, 2017 •

edited

Loading

platan commented Dec 5, 2017 •

edited

Loading

tooomm commented Dec 5, 2017 •

edited

Loading