We have 4 duplicated license headers

[jbampton]

4 duplicated license headers:

https://github.com/apache/sedona-db/tree/main/ci/scripts/rat

On the main sedona repo we use pre-commit to manage the license headers for most file types.

Check out the sedona pre-commit config we run close to 10 similar hooks that insert the same one license header:

See line 89 downwards:

https://github.com/apache/sedona/blob/master/.pre-commit-config.yaml#L89

And we store the license header here:

https://github.com/apache/sedona/blob/master/.github/workflows/license-templates/LICENSE.txt

[paleolimbot]

Thanks for opening!

Those license headers are all slightly different for different languages, although I think we can now remove them. Initially I wrote that script because we had hundreds of files we hadn't licensed yet, but now it's pretty easy to copy and paste a new license header when creating a new file (and we have a CI job that runs the RAT checker and lets us know if we didn't).

I'd prefer to keep our pre-commit simple (perhaps improving the error message on the RAT checker fail would be another way to improve the user experience).

[Mayankaggarwal8055]

Hi, I’d like to work on this issue.
I’ll review the duplicated license header scripts in ci/scripts/rat and check how they relate to the current RAT CI checks before proposing changes.

[Mayankaggarwal8055]

hi @jbampton @paleolimbot

I checked the repository and found that ci/scripts/rat/license.py is not referenced in any GitHub workflow or other script.
CI runs RAT via dev/release/run-rat.sh, and there are no calls to this custom license insertion script.

It appears the files under ci/scripts/rat/ are unused.

I propose removing license.py and the associated license template files to simplify the repository. Please let me know if this aligns with your expectations before I open a PR.

[Mayankaggarwal8055]

Hi @jbampton, @paleolimbot 👋

Following up on my earlier investigation, I’ve opened PR #676 to remove the unused files under ci/scripts/rat.

As mentioned above, license.py is not referenced by any workflow, and RAT is already enforced via dev/release/run-rat.sh, so this change should not affect CI.

Please let me know if you’d prefer a different approach. Happy to adjust if needed.