Skip to content

Conversation

DimitriPapadopoulos
Copy link
Contributor

Summary

Declare licenses using only these two fields, as per PEP 639:

  • license: SPDX license expression consisting of one or more license identifiers
  • license-files: list of license file glob patterns

Supported by maturin ≥ 1.9.0:
https://www.maturin.rs/changelog.html

Test Plan

N/A

Declare licenses using only these two fields, as per PEP 639:
* license:       SPDX license expression consisting of one or more license identifiers
* license-files: list of license file glob patterns

Supported by maturin ≥ 1.9.0:
https://www.maturin.rs/changelog.html
@charliermarsh charliermarsh requested a review from konstin July 22, 2025 21:06
@DimitriPapadopoulos DimitriPapadopoulos marked this pull request as ready for review July 22, 2025 21:07
@ntBre ntBre added the internal An internal refactor or improvement label Jul 22, 2025
"Development Status :: 5 - Production/Stable",
"Environment :: Console",
"Intended Audience :: Developers",
"License :: OSI Approved :: MIT License",
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why is this removed?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@DimitriPapadopoulos DimitriPapadopoulos Jul 24, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Because PEP639 expects only licence and licence-files.

It's redundant with:

license = "MIT"

This comment was marked as outdated.

Copy link

@vivodi vivodi Jul 24, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry, that PEP does indeed recommend removing the license classifier: https://peps.python.org/pep-0639/#deprecate-license-classifiers — I hadn’t looked at it carefully before.

Copy link
Member

@konstin konstin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I confirmed that after this change, there's

License-File: LICENSE
License-Expression: MIT

in the METADATA and a license file at /ruff-0.12.4.dist-info/licenses/LICENSE

@konstin konstin changed the title PEP 639 compliance Use PEP 639 license information for Ruff itself instead of classifier Jul 27, 2025
@konstin konstin added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation and removed internal An internal refactor or improvement labels Jul 27, 2025
@konstin konstin merged commit 13634ff into astral-sh:main Jul 28, 2025
55 checks passed
@MichaReiser MichaReiser removed the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Jul 28, 2025
@MichaReiser
Copy link
Member

I removed the documentation label so that it appears under the "Other" section (we tend to remove the Documentation section in releases)

@vivodi
Copy link

vivodi commented Jul 31, 2025

I see this PR has been fully reverted:

Will you @DimitriPapadopoulos have time to look into it?

@DimitriPapadopoulos
Copy link
Contributor Author

Unfortunately #19624 lacks context. Is the problem that uv build does not support PEP 639 yet?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants