licensing & copyright details about roads HOT 10 CLOSED

@see24 sorry I forgot to push. Should be there now.

from roads.

In this case, we are copyright holder of some files, and Province of BC is copyright holder of others. In addition to making clear who holds the copyright in header for each R file, we should also acknowledge this by including two copyright holders in package metadata. See https://r-pkgs.org/license.html#code-you-bundle

from roads.

@josie-hughes I don't see a license statement in getGraph, did you commit it? Does your second comment mean that only BC will be copyright holders for the functions listed in the first comment? I did make changes to most of those so wondering if it should be both like you did for caribouMetrics?

from roads.

• getGraph,
• lcpList,
• mstList,
• shortestPaths,
• getClosestRoad,
• buildSnapRoads.

from roads.

@josie-hughes I added either a BC copyright statement or an ECCC copyright statement to all the functions and added BC as cph in the DESCRIPTION.

Does that cover everything you think is needed?

from roads.

i think so.

from roads.

We also need a comment explaining the details of joint copyright i.e. we hold x functions, they hold x functions. See https://r-pkgs.org/license.html#code-you-bundle

from roads.

Ok I will make that more explicit in the comments in the Description

from roads.

@josie-hughes hows that?

from roads.

seems ok to me. Ready for review and feedback.

from roads.