4 ms·

HawkEye: A Simple license header checker and formatter in Rust

35 points by tison 2y ago

JTyQZSnP3cQGa8B 2y ago
Is there a point to this if license headers are (supposedly) useless?
- steveklabnik 2y ago
  I think for licenses like the MPL, which are scoped to a single file, including the header makes sense, and isn't particularly onerous: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/MPL/headers/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/MPL/headers/ I don't put headers in projects that use other licenses.
  - codetrotter 2y ago
    I used to put the ISC license in the header of every file when I first started sharing code online under open source licenses. But eventually I realized that a single LICENSE file is best, instead of having the header in all of the files.
- stonogo 2y ago
  If Google wants to use your software, they will whine until you add them. I guess automating it would be nice in that case.
ognarb 2y ago
Use the Reuse specification and tooling instead: https://reuse.software/ https://reuse.software/ There is no need to reinvent a solved problem by rewritting it in rust with a different format, particularly considering that reuse was developed by the FSFE in collaboration with some lawyers.
- giancarlostoro 2y ago
  This isn't the only tooling out there though, typical SCA tooling in most enterprise companies will scan dependency licensing and vulnerabilities.
- rendaw 2y ago
  Their getting started guide tells you to manually add the header to the file. How do you get it to automatically add the header like hawkeye does?
steveklabnik 2y ago
Oh neat! I use https://github.com/apache/skywalking-eyes https://github.com/apache/skywalking-eyes extensively for this, but am not particularly in love with it.
pianoben 2y ago
Neat! I've always wanted a tool like this, but never wanted to build one. The most "good enough" solution for validating license headers I've ever used is just to grep for the copyright line: https://github.com/microsoft/thrifty/blob/master/script/ensure_license_headers.sh https://github.com/microsoft/thrifty/blob/master/script/ensu... This sounds much better.

35 points by tison 2y ago

JTyQZSnP3cQGa8B 2y ago

Is there a point to this if license headers are (supposedly) useless?

steveklabnik 2y ago
I think for licenses like the MPL, which are scoped to a single file, including the header makes sense, and isn't particularly onerous: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/MPL/headers/ https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/MPL/headers/ I don't put headers in projects that use other licenses.
- codetrotter 2y ago
  I used to put the ISC license in the header of every file when I first started sharing code online under open source licenses. But eventually I realized that a single LICENSE file is best, instead of having the header in all of the files.
stonogo 2y ago
If Google wants to use your software, they will whine until you add them. I guess automating it would be nice in that case.

ognarb 2y ago

Use the Reuse specification and tooling instead: https://reuse.software/ https://reuse.software/ There is no need to reinvent a solved problem by rewritting it in rust with a different format, particularly considering that reuse was developed by the FSFE in collaboration with some lawyers.

giancarlostoro 2y ago
This isn't the only tooling out there though, typical SCA tooling in most enterprise companies will scan dependency licensing and vulnerabilities.
rendaw 2y ago
Their getting started guide tells you to manually add the header to the file. How do you get it to automatically add the header like hawkeye does?

steveklabnik 2y ago

Oh neat! I use https://github.com/apache/skywalking-eyes https://github.com/apache/skywalking-eyes extensively for this, but am not particularly in love with it.

pianoben 2y ago

Neat! I've always wanted a tool like this, but never wanted to build one. The most "good enough" solution for validating license headers I've ever used is just to grep for the copyright line: https://github.com/microsoft/thrifty/blob/master/script/ensure_license_headers.sh https://github.com/microsoft/thrifty/blob/master/script/ensu... This sounds much better.