add custom license for France to the Dataverse Doc

[sirineREKIK]

**This PR is for adding a new custom License to the Dataverse Documentation **:

• closes Add new custom License: Etalab Open License 2.0 #9301

Suggestions on how to test this:

• make sure that the License is downloadable when click on the 'license_etalab-2.0.json'

[pdurbin]

@philippconzett @jggautier any thoughts on this? Seems legit. It's in SPDX: https://spdx.org/licenses/etalab-2.0.html

It even has a nice logo:

[jeromeroucou]

Hello,

Sorry to report this later but the request comes from the data gouv research repository.
The etalab license is a French governmental license in order to correspond to the French law. It is already applied in data.gouv.fr, and will be applied in entrepot.recherche.data.gouv.fr when we will have deployed version 5.12.1 which is planned for early March.

Some others links to details the etalab license :

• data.gouv.fr/licences
• spdx.org

Regards,
Jérôme for Recherche Data Gouv

[pdurbin]

@jeromeroucou thanks for the additional context.

I just looked at the preview of the HTML at https://dataverse-guide--9302.org.readthedocs.build/en/9302/installation/config.html#adding-licenses

Here's a screenshot:

@sirineREKIK @jeromeroucou assuming we merge this, we reserve the right to rewrite the surrounding text and otherwise reorganize things as more licenses are added. 😄 We might even rename the file at some point. I hope you don't mind! Overall, I think this is great. For now I've advocated capturing all the license JSON files in the guides as a way of centralizing them. This will make it easier to evolve the format as has been proposed by @philippconzett here:

• standardize license configuration #9262

Speaking of evolving JSON formats, there is a specific issue with the JSON that needs to be addressed because this pull request from @ErykKul was merged recently:

• 8671 license sorting #8697

That is, I get this error when I try to add your license on the develop branch (1bef93a):

{"status":"ERROR","message":"There should be a sort order value in the request body"}

Can you please add a sortOrder? Maybe 10? (Unless @ErykKul thinks it should be a different value.) You can see examples at https://dataverse-guide--9302.org.readthedocs.build/en/9302/installation/config.html#adding-creative-common-licenses . Thanks. You can read more about the sortOrder feature here: https://dataverse-guide--9302.org.readthedocs.build/en/9302/installation/config.html#sorting-licenses

[philippconzett]

I think it should be up to the community to decide which licenses to add to the GitHub repo. The reason why etalab wasn't in my proposal (see PR #9262) is because I only included licenses that were FSF Free/Libre and OSI Approved. I now have include also etalab. According to my proposal, the JSON looks like this:

{
"name": "etalab 2.0",
"uri": "https://github.com/DISIC/politique-de-contribution-open-source/blob/master/LICENSE.pdf",
"shortDescription": "Etalab Open License 2.0",
"iconUrl": "https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/18/Logo-licence-ouverte2.svg/255px-Logo-licence-ouverte2.svg.png",
"active": true
}

Is this correct?

But as Phil said, this would be after my PR is merged.

[jeromeroucou]

@pdurbin @philippconzett thanks for your quick reply !

assuming we merge this, we reserve the right to rewrite the surrounding text and otherwise reorganize things as more licenses are added.

Of course ! This pull request is a first proposition and need to be rework and accept.

Can you please add a sortOrder? Maybe 10?

@philippconzett have already add the licence with sortOrder at 29 in PR #9262.
We notice that the URI of the license has been modified by a link to github. We had initially indicated the HTML page to the spdx website because it's in English. If it is necessary to use a specific link, I think that https://www.etalab.gouv.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/ETALAB-Licence-Ouverte-v2.0.pdf is more appropriate because it is indicated in the page https://www.data.gouv.fr/fr/pages/legal/licences/
And there is possible to keep the icon URL ?

We can add all modifications into the file license after PR #9262 is merged.

[philippconzett]

Sorry, I forgot that I already had added the license in my PR in the following form:

{
"rightsName": "Etalab 2.0",
"rightsURI": "https://github.com/DISIC/politique-de-contribution-open-source/blob/master/LICENSE.pdf",
"rightsIdentifier": "etalab-2.0",
"rightsIdentifierScheme": "SPDX",
"schemeURI": "https://spdx.org/licenses/",
"rightsShortDescription": "Etalab Open License 2.0.",
"rightsIconUrl": "https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/18/Logo-licence-ouverte2.svg/255px-Logo-licence-ouverte2.svg.png
",
"rightsActive": "true",
"sortOrder": 29
}

The sorting is determined by the name of the license, but I guess you could change it before you upload the JSON files.

As for the rightsURI, in my proposal in PR #9262 this URI is the "official" one pointed to from the SPDX page. For example, for Apache 2.0, this is "https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0". If this URI does not work, I used the URI to the SPDX page.

@jeromeroucou Do you want to have https://spdx.org/licenses/etalab-2.0.html in the rightsURI field?

[ErykKul]

Hello. Quick note on the license sort order: it does not have to be unique. In fact, technically it could have been made optional. By making it mandatory, the admins are forced to think about the order in which they should appear in the dropdown. The default is sorting by ID, maintaining the order in which the licenses were added to the system. The sort is then: first by sort order, then by ID. We could, for example, set the sort order of all licenses to 0 and leave the specific ordering to the installations.

I thought it was clearer to set the sort order equal to the ID when you first add the licenses to the system, i.e., reflecting the order of the licenses on the disk. Nevertheless, it was an arbitrary choice.

The sort order is also editable and can be set through the API after the license was added to the system. You can reorder the licenses at any time.

I think we should remain consistent when adding licenses to git and either make them all have the same sort order, or keep the sort order reflecting the sorting on the disk (alphabetical by filename).

[DS-INRAE]

Hello, as @jeromeroucou is not here this week, I'll answer for the question on the link.
Yes we would have prefered the spdx link as it provides links for english version in addition to the french one, which is not the case with the pdf.
If deemed unappropriate, I'd suggest we use https://github.com/etalab/licence-ouverte/blob/master/LO.md rather than the pdf, which is still from the official etalab source and is machine readable :)

[philippconzett]

Thanks, @DS-INRA. I've just replaced the pdf URI with the SPDX URI to the etalab 2.0 license in PR #9262.

[scolapasta]

If you are still interested in this PR, can you please merge and resolve any merge conflicts with the latest from develop? If so, we can prioritize reviewing and QAing the changes. If we don’t hear from you by May 22, 2024, we’ll go ahead and close this PR (it can always be reopened after that date, if there is still interest).

[jeromeroucou]

Hi @scolapasta

We (Recherche Data Gouv team) still interested in this PR, but it dependents on other work like PR #9262 and #10426.
I can't change the status of this PR to draft. I think it's more appropriate while the other work is being completed. Can you change the status ?

[pdurbin]

@jeromeroucou I clicked "convert to draft" for you. And yes, I agree that at least #10426 should get sorted first (we're trying to add some guidance on adding more licenses).