Skip to content

[TRG 7.07 + 10.02] feat: added that the eclipse foundation contributors need to be included in KITs notice. #1399

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Draft
matbmoser wants to merge 5 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

[TRG 7.07 + 10.02] feat: added that the eclipse foundation contributors need to be included in KITs notice. #1399

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
b76d242
feat: added that the eclipse foudation contributiors need to be inclu…
matbmoser Dec 11, 2025
01346d6
feat: added copyright point in the TRGs for 10.02
matbmoser Dec 11, 2025
7465a35
feat: updated changelogs from the TRGs
matbmoser Dec 11, 2025
2bd5174
feat: updated changelog
matbmoser Dec 11, 2025
a89f254
feat: added must for documentation notice.
matbmoser Dec 11, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
46 changes: 46 additions & 0 deletions docs/release/trg-10/trg-10-02.mdx
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ import MenuBookIcon from '@mui/icons-material/MenuBook';
|------------|--------------|----------------------------------------|
| Draft | 12-Apr-2024 | Initial contribution |
| Active | 20-Nov-2025 | Splitted 09.01 Draft into 10.01, 10.02, 10.03 adding the new KIT 2.0 Content Structure |
| Active | 11-Dec-2025 | Added copyright notice eclipse foudation contributors enforcement |

## Why

Expand All @@ -28,6 +29,51 @@ For the KIT Content this two TRGs must be followed:
- [TRG 7.07 - Legal notice for non-code](/docs/release/trg-7/trg-7-07) - Image and media licensing requirements
- [TRG 7.08 - Legal notice for KIT documentation (CC-BY-4.0)](/docs/release/trg-7/trg-7-08) - Documentation licensing

## Copyright Notice

Mandatory for every KIT, it **MUST** be included in every file (not just on the adoption view!).
Copy link
Contributor

@lgblaumeiser lgblaumeiser Dec 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In general, I would assume, that TRG 7.07 is enough, this section is redundant, I would reduce it, if you want to reference that copyright notices have to be done according to 7.07.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@matbmoser matbmoser Dec 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this is done already in another section before.

Copy link
Contributor

@lgblaumeiser lgblaumeiser Dec 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Than, this setion is superfluous, it does not add anything, not describe in 7.07 and only adds redundancy.

KIT documentation works under the CC-BY-4.0 license. Therefore you need to add the "notice" part to make transparent which companies worked on this KIT.
It **MUST** always include the `- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation` copyright statement.

Example:

```md
## NOTICE

This work is licensed under the [CC-BY-4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode).

- SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-4.0
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2025 <Your Company FullName>
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2023, 2025 ZF Friedrichshafen AG
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2023, 2025 Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaft (BMW AG)
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2023, 2025 SAP SE
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2023, 2025 Volkswagen AG
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2023, 2025 Robert Bosch GmbH
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2023, 2025 Mercedes Benz Group
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2023, 2025 BASF SE
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2023, 2025 Schaeffler AG
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2023, 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
Copy link
Contributor

@lgblaumeiser lgblaumeiser Dec 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Leave this example out!

- Source URL: [Source Code](https://github.com/eclipse-tractusx/eclipse-tractusx.github.io/)
```

In case its a new KIT the year can be referenced like that:

Example:

```md
## NOTICE

This work is licensed under the [CC-BY-4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode).

- SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-4.0
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2025 <Your Company FullName>
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2025 Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaft (BMW AG)
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
Copy link
Contributor

@lgblaumeiser lgblaumeiser Dec 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2025 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation

Copy link
Contributor Author

@matbmoser matbmoser Dec 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't understand why we now need to remove the contributor to the eclipse foundation? Look at all the KITs we are including it in every single one. If we don't harmonize it there is just more confusion if we start now creating without it.

Copy link
Contributor

@lgblaumeiser lgblaumeiser Dec 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We really should not encourage using that, as it is a nice workaround but not the proper way. If, e.g., I use it, I actually am on legal uncertain ground, as I wrote. I am the contributor but the owner of the ip I contribute is owned by Cofinity-X GmbH. You could argue, that the term can be interpreted as Cofinity-X GmbH is the contributor and I am the willingless tool that executes that, but in general it is not clear and in the wrong interpretation, I violate my employees contract in stating that.

It is also awful for the maintainer of the project, because the close says nothing about the ownership. The message is, that the contributor does not care about the contributed ip and does not want to be bugged again with it. Unfortunately, there are situations, where the consent of all ip owners is needed, but if this is not expressed properly, it is very hard to find out, who the owner of the stuff is.

So, best practice is, that you should use a clear ownership declaration, like (c) 2025 Cofinity-X GmbH, because then, ownership is clear and Cofinity-X can be asked regarding legal aspects, if the need arises.

That is, why we should not encourage the usage of it by providing it in examples. It is a last resort, which I admit also use in certain situations, but it is typically in situations, where we tak about a very small amount of changes, the original author of a whole KIT view should reflect the ownership of the expressed ip by the name of the owner. Period.

- Source URL: [Source Code](https://github.com/eclipse-tractusx/eclipse-tractusx.github.io/)
```

For more information consult [TRG 7.07 - Legal notice for non-code](/docs/release/trg-7/trg-7-07) - Image and media licensing requirements

## General Requirements

- A KIT must have a <code>changelog.md</code> following semantic versioning + the release date of Tractus-X - see [TRG 1.03 - CHANGELOG.md](/docs/release/trg-1/trg-1-03)
Expand Down
9 changes: 6 additions & 3 deletions docs/release/trg-7/trg-7-07.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -4,7 +4,8 @@ title: TRG 7.07 - Legal notice for non-code (e.g. KITS, documentation, images, s

| Status | Created | Post-History |
|--------|-------------|-------------------------------|
| Active | 27-06-2025 | Integration of non-code rules |
| Active | 11-Dec-2025 | Added copyright notice eclipse foudation contributors enforcement |
| Active | 27-Jun-2025 | Integration of non-code rules |
| Active | 25-Apr-2024 | Updates for CC-BY-4.0 license |
| Active | 18-Jul-2023 | Update: improved description |
| | 13-Apr-2023 | Initial version |
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -61,7 +62,7 @@ For text files, like files in the markdown format, the attribution is done direc
section. The attribution is shown with an example for a CC-BY-4.0 licensed markdown file. For other formats like
slides, pdf, and others adapt the information in an adequate way.

Add a `NOTICE` section (post or preamble) into your dedicated documentation file, with the following information:
Add a `NOTICE` section (post or preamble) into your dedicated documentation file, with the following information **MUST** be included:

```text
## NOTICE
Expand All @@ -70,6 +71,7 @@ This work is licensed under the [CC-BY-4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses

- SPDX-License-Identifier: CC-BY-4.0
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 202x {Owner}
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 202x Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
Copy link
Contributor

@lgblaumeiser lgblaumeiser Dec 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That is not the preferred way, it should be a clear statement of who the copyright owner is. Actually, this formulation is misleading, who is the contributor, typically a person, who is the owner of the ip contributed by this person, typically the employer of that person, so this change is wrong!

Copy link
Contributor Author

@matbmoser matbmoser Dec 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In the eclipse project handbook we have written that it is not the person but the company which is doing the contribution: https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#ip-copyright-headers, until now the eclipse foundation asked us to add this line SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 202x Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation in our kits.

Therefore I am investigating the real need for it, and starting a discussion if we need to enforce that.

Copy link
Contributor

@lgblaumeiser lgblaumeiser Dec 12, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The Handbook is pretty unclear at this point. If you read the section on what a contributor is, it is stated, that it is basically the person doing the contribution, as it is also the person, who signs the ECA, if there is no company ECA signed (last thing I added). In this case, the copyright owner and the contributor are simply not the same entity. I would suggest that we clarify this with the foundation, as I think, that part is not so clear as it could be. Still, the phrase should be the last resort like the "and others" part in the handbook section you mentioned. Let us phrase the question to the EF together, so that we get the answer we want.

- Source URL: https://github.com/eclipse-tractusx/<myrepo>/<link_to_doc_or_doc_dir> (+)
```

Expand All @@ -84,9 +86,10 @@ Explanations in brackets, do not copy. PLEASE.
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2021 Owner2 (-> Owner2 created the content in 2021)
- SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2021 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation
```

:::

The copyright for the Eclipse Foundation Contributors `202x Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation` (with the respective year(s)) **MUST** be included in all markdown NOTICE copyright. For more information consult [Eclipse Foundation Rulebook - Legal Documentation](https://www.eclipse.org/projects/handbook/#legaldoc)
Copy link
Contributor

@lgblaumeiser lgblaumeiser Dec 11, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is already stated in 29-32, so this statement is redundant. We could agree on the MUST which is missing above, but please add it there


### Self-created content

Self-created non-text content like an image should have the copyright and license information included, whereever
Expand Down
Loading