-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Switch to PackageLicenseExpression #31
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Not understanding where release 1.1.0 came from, and why the packageversion was not up to date? |
Just curious (since I have the same in TaskSeq, and I also have MIT), why is this change needed? |
This way, the nuspec gets a top level field that authoritatively defines the license in terms of a known set of approved OSI licenses (i.e. the string MIT has a very specific meaning in that context, mapping to the full license text) |
Ah, do you mean the scanner of projects that download and use the package? Sounds like a bug in the scanner to me, but if this fixes it, I should update my packages similarly. Don't want SOC2 compliance or similar to prevent companies from using your libs. Sorry to barge in and hijack your thread, btw, but your change caught me ;). Edit: just checked for comparison, indeed, F# uses the same format: |
Not really. The high level rules are that you either have a SPDX expression, or a file or a url. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/reference/msbuild-targets#packing-a-license-expression-or-a-license-file I'm note sure the current But, even for PackageLicense files vs expressions, the scanner would need to implement parsing to be able to conclusively determine that it was an unaltered version of a given known license text. I see your edit as I glance now! Everything looks in order there (it would also have appeared on the scanner list my side) |
Haha, indeed, no change in TaskSeq needed. I made a typo when searching and turned out it was |
Gotta keep those scanners quiet