docs(licenses): list kuberture and ouroboros - #649
Conversation
Both ship with the platform — ouroboros since v1.3.4, kuberture since v1.4.3 — and both are absent from the page that enumerates what Cozystack ships and under which licence. The omission carries meaning beyond a missing row. The page states that Cozystack-maintained components are Apache-2.0 and are not listed individually, so the list is the set of upstreams. Leaving these two off it left their status to inference at exactly the point where a reader is trying to establish it. Added to next and v1.6; earlier released versions keep their frozen snapshots. Assisted-By: Claude Signed-off-by: Andrei Kvapil <kvapss@gmail.com>
|
Important
This repository does not receive automatic reviews because it has fewer than 10 stars. ⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: defaults Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Plus Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (2)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughAdded license cards for the optional ChangesNetworking license documentation
Estimated code review effort: 1 (Trivial) | ~2 minutes Suggested reviewers: 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
✅ Deploy Preview for cozystack ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
…3784) ## What this PR does Brings `GOVERNANCE.md` in line with the organisation it describes: what the project governs, and what it ships but does not. ### Sub-projects The `Code Repositories` list named seven repositories and was wrong in both directions. Five of the six sub-projects whose code ships in the distribution were missing from it — `etcd-operator`, `keycloak-kms-proxy`, `local-ccm`, `cozystack-scheduler` and `ingress-nginx-with-protobuf-exporter` — while `talos-bootstrap` and `talos-meta-tool` were listed although an adopter installs neither. Nothing stated what being on the list meant, which is why it drifted. It is replaced by a section organised around the distinction that decides scope: whether a repository's output reaches the artifact an adopter installs. Packaged sub-projects get a table naming what each one contributes, its stability, and its owners — the same handles each repository's `CODEOWNERS` already carries. Independent tooling, project infrastructure and upstream forks are described in a line each, as explicitly outside that scope. Three things an evaluator finds anyway are stated rather than left to be discovered: that one fork (`apimachinery`) is compiled into the product, why, and that the fix is proposed upstream as kubernetes/kubernetes#135537; that four repositories are private, with the reason for each, and that none of them contributes to the distribution; and that telemetry is received by a component adopters do not install, with a link to the opt-out. ### Third-party Dependencies Writes down which shipped components the project does not govern. Cozystack vendors software it does not own, which is ordinary and needs no defence — but the boundary was nowhere stated. This is a Required item on the Incubation checklist ("All project metadata and resources are vendor-neutral"), and an evaluator currently has nothing in the governance document to read it off. The section says two things: what the arrangement is, and where the components are listed. It names nothing itself. The [Licenses](https://cozystack.io/docs/v1.6/operations/configuration/licenses/) page carries the list, and by its own framing carries upstreams only — Cozystack-maintained components are Apache-2.0 and are not listed there individually. Appearing on that page is therefore already the classification, so a second list here would only drift from it. Two components that belong on that page were missing from it despite shipping since v1.3.4 and v1.4.3; cozystack/website#649 adds them. Nothing moves, nothing is relicensed, no mirroring changes. This documents the existing arrangement, which each package's `values.yaml` already describes at its own level. ### Downstream repositories Walked the trigger map in `docs/agents/contributing.md` against the diff. It touches `GOVERNANCE.md` only, and no trigger concerns governance documents — the website triggers are package additions, platform values, variants, components, release assets, `ApplicationDefinition` semantics, the Talos pin and developer tooling. The website PR linked above is a companion, not a consequence of this diff: it fixes a pre-existing gap on the Licenses page that stands on its own. - [x] No downstream repository is affected by this change ### Release note ```release-note NONE ``` <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit * **Documentation** * Added governance guidance for project sub-components, including ownership, licensing, maintenance, and repository classifications. * Documented project infrastructure, upstream forks, private repositories, and telemetry services. * Clarified how third-party software is sourced, governed, mirrored, and versioned. * Linked to a license inventory listing third-party components and their applicable licenses. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
What this PR does
Adds
kubertureandouroborosto the Licenses page.Both ship with the platform —
ouroborossince Cozystack v1.3.4,kuberturesince v1.4.3 — and neither appears on the page that enumerates what Cozystack ships and under which licence. Both are otherwise documented on this site:kuberturehas its own page under Networking, andouroborosis covered by the hairpin/PROXY-protocol guide.The omission is worth more than a missing row. The page states that Cozystack-maintained components are Apache-2.0 and are not listed individually, which makes this list the set of upstream components. Leaving these two off it left their status to inference — at exactly the point where a reader is trying to establish it. This matters for the Incubation checklist item "All project metadata and resources are vendor-neutral": both are maintained by an individual who is also a Cozystack maintainer, so "is this an upstream or is it project code in a personal account?" is a question an evaluator will actually ask.
Placed in Networking after Hetzner RobotLB, which is the closest neighbour in kind — a third-party component maintained outside the organisation. No logo is passed; the shortcode renders an initials badge when the asset is absent.
Applied to
nextandv1.6. Earlier released versions keep their frozen snapshots.Companion change stating the same boundary in governance: cozystack/cozystack#3784.
Summary by CodeRabbit