Correct Licensing of Solidus Gems - #6560
Open
jarednorman wants to merge 5 commits into
Open
Conversation
The license files only credited Spree Commerce Inc. for 2007-2014, leaving the decade of post-fork work unattributed. Solidus has no copyright assignment, so the copyright in contributions since the 2015 fork rests with the individual contributors; add a collective notice for them alongside the retained Spree notice, which BSD-3 requires us to keep intact for the code it covers. Covers the root LICENSE.md and the identical per-gem copies in core, api, and sample. The admin gem's MIT license is unaffected.
The solidus_admin gemspec has declared BSD-3-Clause since the gem was created, but the LICENSE file added in the initial scaffold (fab9cff) contained MIT text, apparently unreviewed gem-template boilerplate. Released gems have been shipping MIT text under a BSD-3-Clause metadata declaration. Replace the LICENSE contents with the BSD-3-Clause text used by the other gems, with a copyright line reflecting that solidus_admin is all post-fork code.
The solidus_backend gemspec declares BSD-3-Clause but the gem shipped no license file. Add the same BSD-3-Clause text as the other Spree-descended gems.
Both solidus_promotions and solidus_legacy_promotions declare BSD-3-Clause but shipped no license file. Legacy promotions contains Spree-descended code and gets the same text as core; the new promotions gem is all post-fork code and gets the Solidus-only copyright line.
The solidus meta-gem's file list only included README.md and lib/, so the gem most users install shipped no license text despite declaring BSD-3-Clause. Add the license to the file list. Rename LICENSE.md to LICENSE to match the per-gem license files and strip the markdown formatting so it reads as plain text, updating the two references to the old name.
github-actions
Bot
added
changelog:solidus_api
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #6560 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 95.07% 92.16% -2.91%
==========================================
Files 460 1037 +577
Lines 7924 21210 +13286
==========================================
+ Hits 7534 19549 +12015
- Misses 390 1661 +1271 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
tvdeyen
approved these changes
Aug 27, 2026
Member
Author
|
I'm going to hold on merging this until we confirm that one detail with @elia. I don't want to erroneously alter Admin's licensing. 🙂 |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Our gems' license files had drifted from reality in a bunch of ways. This PR: