Switch from license-file to license #52
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
CLA Signature Action: All authors have signed the CLA. You may need to manually re-run the blocking PR check if it doesn't pass in a few minutes. |
According to the cargo docs, the license field is used when you have a standard license that has an existing SPDX 2.3 license expression. The license-file field should be used when you are using a non-standard license type that needs more details. So why does this matter? Some automated tools will parse these fields and use them as an input to license compliance checks. When using the license-file field it will go a more complicated path, where an MIT license should just get a rubber stamp from compliance. This change has no impact on the actual licensing, it just reflects it better in a machine parsable way
stusmall
force-pushed
the
update-license-style
branch
from
462a66c to
ba7d4ce
Compare
|
I have read the CLA Document and I hereby sign the CLA |
kushudai
approved these changes
Dec 13, 2024
|
Thanks @stusmall! |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What problem are we solving?
According to the cargo docs, the license field is used when you have a standard license that has an existing SPDX 2.3 license expression. The license-file field should be used when you are using a non-standard license type that needs more details.
So why does this matter? Some automated tools will parse these fields and use them as an input to license compliance checks. When using the license-file field it will go a more complicated path, where an MIT license should just get a rubber stamp from compliance.
How are we solving the problem?
This change has no impact on the actual licensing, it just reflects it better in a machine parsable way
Checks
Please check these off before promoting the pull request to non-draft status.