scancode: missing our pbl license in scanning the licenses

[0xc0170]

Description of defect

The license checker scancode does not recognize our Permissive Binary License , we should add it to scancode. The quick fix until the scancode is updated, similar to what we do with SPDX, finding this license and not return an error (it is permissive).

#13826 - this is PR affected, these files there have a problem:

Found files with missing license details, please review and fix
File: whd_version.h reason: Missing license header
File: 4343WA1-mfgtest_bin.c reason: Non-permissive license
File: 4343WA1-mfgtest_clm_blob.c reason: Non-permissive license
File: 4343WA1_bin.c reason: Non-permissive license
File: 4343WA1_clm_blob.c reason: Non-permissive license
File: resources.h reason: Non-permissive license
File: wifi_nvram_image.h reason: Non-permissive license
Found files with missing SPDX identifier, please review and fix
File: stm32h7_eth_init.c reason: Missing SPDX license identifier
File: PeripheralNames.h reason: Missing SPDX license identifier
File: PinNames.h reason: Missing SPDX license identifier
File: system_clock_override.c reason: Missing SPDX license identifier
File: cmsis_nvic.h reason: Missing SPDX license identifier

Implement similar function to has_spdx_text_in_analysed_file in scancode-evaluate script

@harmut01

Target(s) affected by this defect ?

Any

Toolchain(s) (name and version) displaying this defect ?

Any

What version of Mbed-os are you using (tag or sha) ?

mbed-os-6.4.0

What version(s) of tools are you using. List all that apply (E.g. mbed-cli)

Any

How is this defect reproduced ?

Create a PR with changing any Permissive Binary License file

[0xc0170]

cc @ARMmbed/mbed-os-maintainers - We should fix this asap, as its blocking #13826

[0xc0170]

This should fix:

File: 4343WA1-mfgtest_bin.c reason: Non-permissive license
File: 4343WA1-mfgtest_clm_blob.c reason: Non-permissive license
File: 4343WA1_bin.c reason: Non-permissive license
File: 4343WA1_clm_blob.c reason: Non-permissive license

[harmut01]

A workaround has been added to our evaluation script. I'll be briefly raising a PR to get the change approved.

[harmut01]

@0xc0170 @facchinm I'd also like to raise an issue to get the licenses that are causing errors to be added to the checking software but I can't see any reference to LicenseRef-PBL in the SPDX list of licenses. Is this a valid SPDX identifier?

[0xc0170]

LicenseRef-PBL

As it is our license, we should add it. Lets talk to the license team. I've noticed also the url we provide: https://www.mbed.com/licenses/PBL-1.0 does not exist anymore. Time to fix this as well.

[ciarmcom]

Thank you for raising this detailed GitHub issue. I am now notifying our internal issue triagers.
Internal Jira reference: https://jira.arm.com/browse/IOTOSM-2625

[pombredanne]

Hi 👋
ScanCode maintainer here..
I see in #13847 (comment)

Scancode does not currently have our license in its database as PBL is not a recognized SPDX license

It is fairly easy to add these to ScanCode... just tell me what these are.

[0xc0170]

@pombredanne thanks for getting back to this, we still should add the license !

The license text is https://os.mbed.com/licenses/permissive-binary-license/, the license header is:

/*
 * Copyright (c) 2019
 * SPDX-License-Identifier: LicenseRef-PBL
 *
 * This file and the related binary are licensed under the
 * Permissive Binary License, Version 1.0 (the "License");
 * you may not use these files except in compliance with the License.
 *
 * You may obtain a copy of the License here:
 * LICENSE-permissive-binary-license-1.0.txt and at
 * https://www.mbed.com/licenses/PBL-1.0
 *
 * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
 * limitations under the License.
 */

SPDX LicenseRef-PBL. is there anything else required?

[pombredanne]

@0xc0170 That's prefect! I created aboutcode-org/scancode-toolkit#2617 on our side

[pombredanne]

is https://www.mbed.com/licenses/PBL-1.0 the canonical URL though?

[0xc0170]

is https://www.mbed.com/licenses/PBL-1.0 the canonical URL though?

Yes, this is the url at the moment.

Thank you for fixing this!