🌱 Add script for checking licenses

[sanya301]

Fixes #1891

Adds a script that iterates through all .go and .sh files and checks if a license exists in the first 4 lines. Similar script to the SDK https://github.com/operator-framework/operator-sdk/blob/master/hack/check-license.sh with some changes.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @sanya301!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/kubebuilder 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/kubebuilder has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @sanya301. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[sanya301]

The script currently leads to the following files failing the check. @camilamacedo86 let me know if you would like to exclude certain folders from the check, or if we need to add licenses to below.

github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kubebuilder/docs/book/src/cronjob-tutorial/testdata/project/controllers/cronjob_controller_test.go
github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kubebuilder/docs/book/src/cronjob-tutorial/testdata/project/controllers/suite_test.go
github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kubebuilder/pkg/plugins/golang/v3/scaffolds/internal/templates/api/webhook_suitetest.go
github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kubebuilder/pkg/plugins/golang/v3/scaffolds/internal/templates/api/webhook_suitetest.go
github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kubebuilder/pkg/plugins/golang/v3/scaffolds/internal/templates/api/webhook_suitetest.go
github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kubebuilder/pkg/plugins/golang/v3/scaffolds/internal/templates/api/webhook_suitetest.go
github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kubebuilder/pkg/plugins/golang/v3/scaffolds/internal/templates/api/webhook_suitetest.go
github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kubebuilder/pkg/plugins/golang/v3/scaffolds/internal/templates/api/webhook_suitetest.go
github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kubebuilder/pkg/plugins/golang/v3/scaffolds/internal/templates/api/webhook_suitetest.go

[estroz]

@sanya301 yes those files need licenses. Thanks!

/ok-to-test

[sanya301]

Thanks @estroz! Should I just add the same license as this for the suite test files that don't have them? https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kubebuilder/blob/master/pkg/plugins/golang/v3/scaffolds/internal/templates/api/group.go#L1

[estroz]

Yes, with the current year.

[camilamacedo86]

Thank you for your contribution.
Just a few nits are missing for we get this one merged.
a) See that the mojo is not right. It is not a breaking change for any kb user. Could you please update it with Infra/Tests/Other: 🌱 (:seedling:)
b) Could you please give space at the end of the files?
c) Also, we must ensure that the PR pass in the CI. That means that we need to add here the header/license for all missing cases.

[camilamacedo86]

Could we have a GA /ci job new only for this one to make it easier for us to know when/if fails?
I mean, i new target + GitHub actions?

[sanya301]

So do you want a Github actions in addition to the script? I thought we wanted one or the other, otherwise it would be repetitive. It didn't seem like a lot of people were using the github action so I decided to go with the script

[camilamacedo86]

The suggestion would be to call this one only in a GA that does this check.
Not call the test twice at all. That would mean not adding test-license in this target also.

The reason would be to make it easier for contributors to check why/what is falling in the ci.
However, that is just nit. It is passing on the tests now so I am ok with too.

[camilamacedo86]

Thank you for the contribution 🥇
For we get this one merged, could you please just squash the commits?

/approved

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: camilamacedo86, sanya301

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [camilamacedo86]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[camilamacedo86]

/lgtm