Skip to content

chore: add NOTICE file to align with opendataloader-project#9

Closed
hyunhee-jo wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
chore/add-notice
Closed

chore: add NOTICE file to align with opendataloader-project#9
hyunhee-jo wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
chore/add-notice

Conversation

@hyunhee-jo
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Objective

Downstream users redistributing the opendataloader-project family
(pdf engine + llamaindex reader + langchain integration + bench) face
inconsistent NOTICE expectations. The upstream opendataloader-pdf
ships a NOTICE file (Apache-2.0 § 4(d) attribution + third-party
pointer), but this repo did not — leaving downstream redistributors
unsure which copyright/notices to carry forward when they ship
pdf + llamaindex together.

Approach

Add a NOTICE file matching the upstream opendataloader-pdf
convention:

  • Same Apache-2.0 boilerplate, retitled "LlamaIndex OpenDataLoader PDF".
  • Copyright "Hancom, Inc." consistent with upstream.
  • Repo-specific URL.

This repo does not yet have a THIRD_PARTY/ folder (unlike pdf and
langchain), so the third-party section honestly points to
pyproject.toml + PyPI package metadata and notes the folder may be
added later.

NOTICE is not a strict Apache-2.0 requirement (§ 4(d) only obligates
preservation if a NOTICE exists), but adding it keeps the family
consistent and gives downstream redistributors a single, predictable
attribution source.

Evidence

Metadata-only change; no runtime behavior. Verified via file inspection:

Scenario Expected Actual
NOTICE present at repo root yes yes
First line LlamaIndex OpenDataLoader PDF LlamaIndex OpenDataLoader PDF
Apache-2.0 boilerplate matches upstream pdf NOTICE matches (same wording, retitled)
Third-party section honest about state yes yes (points to pyproject.toml + PyPI)
LICENSE / pyproject license Apache-2.0 (unchanged) Apache-2.0 (unchanged)

Companion PRs aligning the rest of the family:

Follow-up (out of scope)

Adding a THIRD_PARTY/ folder (consolidated THIRD_PARTY_LICENSES.md /
THIRD_PARTY_NOTICES.md / licenses/) to match the rest of the family
is a separate task and can be tracked in a follow-up issue.

Objective: Downstream users redistributing the opendataloader-project
family (pdf engine + llamaindex reader) face inconsistent NOTICE
expectations. The upstream `opendataloader-pdf` ships a NOTICE file
(Apache-2.0 § 4(d) attribution + third-party pointer), but
`opendataloader-pdf-llamaindex` did not, leaving redistributors unsure
which copyright/notices to carry forward.

Approach: Add a NOTICE file matching the upstream convention — same
Apache-2.0 boilerplate, retitled "LlamaIndex OpenDataLoader PDF",
pointing to this repo's own URL. This repo does not yet have a
THIRD_PARTY/ folder, so the third-party section points to
pyproject.toml + PyPI package metadata and notes the folder may be
added later. NOTICE is not a strict Apache-2.0 requirement, but adding
it keeps the family consistent and gives downstream redistributors a
single, predictable attribution source.

Evidence: Metadata-only change; no runtime behavior. Verified via:

| Scenario                                | Expected                          | Actual                                  |
|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
| NOTICE present at repo root             | yes                               | yes                                     |
| NOTICE first line                       | "LlamaIndex OpenDataLoader PDF"   | "LlamaIndex OpenDataLoader PDF"         |
| Apache-2.0 boilerplate                  | matches upstream pdf NOTICE       | matches (same wording, retitled)        |
| Third-party section honest about state  | yes                               | yes (points to pyproject.toml + PyPI)   |
| LICENSE / pyproject license unchanged   | Apache-2.0 (unchanged)            | Apache-2.0 (unchanged)                  |
@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coderabbitai Bot commented Apr 29, 2026

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@hyunhee-jo has exceeded the limit for the number of commits that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 48 minutes and 17 seconds before requesting another review.

To keep reviews running without waiting, you can enable usage-based add-on for your organization. This allows additional reviews beyond the hourly cap. Account admins can enable it under billing.

⌛ 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: ASSERTIVE

Plan: Pro

Run ID: cc2b6dd9-497e-4550-a6ad-74085c7fda98

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between cba73a6 and ef8215e.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • NOTICE

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
Review rate limit: 0/1 reviews remaining, refill in 48 minutes and 17 seconds.

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

@hyunhee-jo hyunhee-jo closed this Apr 30, 2026
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.

1 participant