License conflict

[VictorLamoine]

• package.xml is Apache v2 license
• https://github.com/ros-industrial/keyence_experimental/blob/kinetic-devel/LICENSE is BSD

[Jmeyer1292]

@shaun-edwards You set this up as a BSD repo? Was this because prior work by Matt West or Gijs was under that license?

[VictorLamoine]

@Jmeyer1292 Friendly ping 🐷

[gavanderhoorn]

It's not pretty, but I don't believe this is an actual 'conflict': BSD and Apache are (ianal and afaiu) compatible, so while it does not make much sense to put a BSD license file in a repository and then state that the package(s) it contains are Apache, it seems more like something that could do with some clarification than an actual conflict.

@Jmeyer1292: ljv7_rawdata.h and the associated cpp file have a BSD-3 license attached (here and here). That may be why @shaun-edwards initialised the repository with a BSD license.

I believe the proper way to address the issue raised by @VictorLamoine is to state both licenses in the license tag in the manifest, and to add both LICENSE files to the root of the repository.

[gavanderhoorn]

And we would probably also want to make sure all files have a proper license statement in a preamble.

Spot checking shows quite a few files without one.

Especially in projects with multiple licenses being explicit about this is important.