Add manifest file and update license file - #159
Open
dhavaljk wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Dhaval Khandla <dhavaljk@ti.com>
Collaborator
|
/agentic_describe |
Collaborator
|
/agentic_review |
PR Summary by QodoReplace LICENSE with manifest-based licensing documentation
AI Description
Diagram
High-Level Assessment
Files changed (2)
|
pratheesh-ti
approved these changes
Aug 21, 2026
Code Review by Qodo
1. Manifest metadata inconsistent
|
![qodo-code-review[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/484649?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| @@ -0,0 +1 @@ | |||
| [Manifest Document Link](./MANIFEST.html) No newline at end of file | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
1. License text removed 🐞 Bug ≡ Correctness
LICENSE.md now contains only a link to MANIFEST.html instead of the actual license terms, which will break common license scanners/packagers that expect the license text in LICENSE*/COPYING* files. This can cause downstream compliance and distribution checks to fail because the canonical license text is no longer discoverable in a standard location.
Agent Prompt
## Issue description
The repo no longer exposes the project license text in a conventional root license file. `LICENSE.md` is currently just a link to `MANIFEST.html`, which many automated compliance tools will not parse.
## Issue Context
The license text exists only inside an HTML document, but standard tooling generally expects a plaintext license in `LICENSE`, `LICENSE.md`, or `COPYING`.
## Fix Focus Areas
- LICENSE.md[1-1]
- MANIFEST.html[292-299]
## Suggested fix
- Put the full BSD license text back into `LICENSE` or `LICENSE.md` (keep the manifest link as an additional reference if desired).
- If the manifest is required, keep it, but don’t make it the only place where the license terms live.
ⓘ Copy this prompt and use it to remediate the issue with your preferred AI generation tools
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this the standard way TI is doing licenses now?
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this the standard way TI is doing licenses now?
Comment on lines
+253
to
+258
| <td id="version" name="version" rowspan="2"> | ||
| <span>01.00.00</span> | ||
| </td> | ||
| <td id="license" name="license" rowspan="2"> | ||
| <span>BSD-3-Clause</span> | ||
| </td> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
2. Manifest metadata inconsistent 🐞 Bug ≡ Correctness
MANIFEST.html declares OpenPRU version 01.00.00 and license BSD-3-Clause, but package.json declares version 07.03.00 and license BSD-2-Clause. This inconsistency can cause incorrect compliance reporting and confusion about what license/version actually applies to the distributed artifact.
Agent Prompt
## Issue description
`MANIFEST.html` reports a version and license identifier that conflict with the repository/package metadata.
## Issue Context
Automations often use `package.json` for version/license, while compliance teams may use the manifest; conflicting declarations create real compliance risk.
## Fix Focus Areas
- MANIFEST.html[250-258]
- package.json[1-21]
## Suggested fix
- Decide the authoritative license identifier (BSD-2-Clause vs BSD-3-Clause) and update *either* the manifest or `package.json` so they match.
- Update the manifest version (`01.00.00`) to match the repository/package version (`07.03.00`), or explain why the manifest is intentionally different (and then also update the manifest title/labels to make that explicit).
ⓘ Copy this prompt and use it to remediate the issue with your preferred AI generation tools
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I do not see any references to BSD-2-Clause in the open-pru repo, or any files named package.json. Please provide the exact path to the files where you think there are conflicts.
nsaulnier-ti
requested changes
Aug 26, 2026
| @@ -0,0 +1 @@ | |||
| [Manifest Document Link](./MANIFEST.html) No newline at end of file | |||
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this the standard way TI is doing licenses now?
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
5 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.
No description provided.