The use of a CC license in the example metadata is a poor choice for a couple of reasons:
CC licenses should not be used for code. Ever. BSD, Apache 2.0, LGPL, GPL and AGPL cover all typical use cases.
The "NonCommercial" clause on CC licenses is a legal nightmare, since "commercial" is a poorly defined term.
I suggest changing the example to a simple "Apache License, Version 2.0", since that is most in keeping with the underlying language ethos (e.g. the Contributor Agreement for CPython core and the standard library recommends using the Apache License as the underlying distribution license on the code when granting relicensing rights to the PSF).