Use SPDX license identifier for project metadata

[cdce8p]

Description of Change

PEP 639 specified the use of SPDX license expressions for license metadata.
Setuptools v77 added full support for it. However that version requires Python >=3.9.

Until 3.8 is dropped, I believe it makes sense to just use the SPDX identifier with the old license.text field.

https://packaging.python.org/en/latest/guides/writing-pyproject-toml/#license-and-license-files

Checklist for All Submissions

• I have added change info to CHANGES.rst
• If this is resolving an issue (needed so future developers can determine if change is still necessary and under what conditions) (can be provided via link to issue with these details):
  • Detailed description of issue
  • Alternative methods considered (if any)
  • How issue is being resolved
  • How issue can be reproduced
• If this is providing a new feature (can be provided via link to issue with these details):
  • Detailed description of new feature
  • Why needed
  • Alternatives methods considered (if any)

Checklist when updating botocore and/or aiohttp versions

• I have read and followed CONTRIBUTING.rst
• I have updated test_patches.py where/if appropriate (also check if no changes necessary)
• I have ensured that the awscli/boto3 versions match the updated botocore version
• I have added URL to diff: boto/botocore@[CURRENT_BOTO_VERSION_TAG]...[NEW_BOTO_VERSION_TAG]

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 90.79%. Comparing base (92142cd) to head (8e4ebbf).
Report is 38 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1325   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   90.79%   90.79%           
=======================================
  Files          68       68           
  Lines        6553     6553           
=======================================
  Hits         5950     5950           
  Misses        603      603           

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	90.79% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[jakob-keller]

Thank you, that makes sense to me. Could you please do a rebase on main?

[jakob-keller]

Sorry, our approach to releasing and versioning is a bit weird. Could you please revert the version bump (2.22.0 is currently unreleased)?

[jakob-keller]

Thanks a lot!

[jakob-keller]

This project requires verified commit signatures: https://docs.github.com/en/authentication/managing-commit-signature-verification/about-commit-signature-verification

Could you please make sure your commits can be verified by GitHub? Otherwise, if you want, I could re-commit the changes for you to pass that blocker.

[cdce8p]

@jakob-keller Force pushed the commit to add the signature. Should be good now. Not sure why the one job is failing though. Looks unrelated.