Skip to content

Add SPDX License Header Check CI workflow#2

Merged
damo-da merged 4 commits into
mainfrom
feat/jaw-79-spdx-header-check
May 10, 2026
Merged

Add SPDX License Header Check CI workflow#2
damo-da merged 4 commits into
mainfrom
feat/jaw-79-spdx-header-check

Conversation

@damo-da

@damo-da damo-da commented May 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Summary

Adds an SPDX License Header Check CI workflow that validates:

  • LICENSE file contains Hippocratic License 3.0
  • All tracked source files have SPDX-License-Identifier headers
  • SPDX identifiers reference Hippocratic-3.0
  • Governance files (SECURITY.md, CONTRIBUTING.md, CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md) exist

§12.4 Metadata

  • Issue: JAW-79 — SPDX-header CI check for Hippocratic License compliance
  • Paperclip-Run-Id: fd806346-80d2-4313-9b1c-17ad54b5ea7f
  • Rationale: Org-wide SPDX-header compliance under Hippocratic License 3.0, approved by Turnip via §12.3 review
  • Rollback: Revert commit(s) on this branch, delete workflow file, close PR — no data or schema impact

Approval Trace

  • §12.3 approval: Turnip, Regulations Governor · 2026-05-09 23:23 PT
  • Approval comment: JAW-79 #comment-df81c5ee

JawafdehiBot and others added 3 commits May 9, 2026 23:07
- LICENSE: Hippocratic License 3.0 (HL3) with Jawafdehi.org as licensor
- SECURITY.md: Vulnerability reporting instructions
- CONTRIBUTING.md: Contribution guidelines
- CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md: Contributor Covenant 2.1

Replaces previous license (MIT) where applicable.
Part of JAW-67 — org-wide Hippocratic licensing.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
Enforcement-level SPDX header validation for Hippocratic License 3.0
compliance.

Part of JAW-79 — SPDX-header CI check for Hippocratic License compliance.

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
@coderabbitai

coderabbitai Bot commented May 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@JawafdehiBot has exceeded the limit for the number of commits that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 59 minutes and 47 seconds before requesting another review.

You’ve run out of usage credits. Purchase more in the billing tab.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 150e2359-bf14-447f-a685-764fefa76009

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b19195a and 67576dc.

📒 Files selected for processing (7)
  • .github/workflows/spdx-header-check.yml
  • CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md
  • CONTRIBUTING.md
  • LICENSE
  • LICENSING.md
  • README.md
  • SECURITY.md
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch feat/jaw-79-spdx-header-check

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.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

- Unify file glob lists across header-check and identifier-verify steps
- Remove *.json from header enforcement (JSON has no comment syntax)
- Change Step 2 to warning-only (matches $12.3 approval understanding)
- Both steps now use identical file coverage

Co-Authored-By: Paperclip <noreply@paperclip.ing>
@damo-da damo-da merged commit 13d87c6 into main May 10, 2026
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants