-
```
There are (at lest) two files in the repository that are not licensed under the
New BSD License like the web page and the LICENCE file states.
The files and licences are:
- src/client/mac/handle…
-
```
There are (at lest) two files in the repository that are not licensed under the
New BSD License like the web page and the LICENCE file states.
The files and licences are:
- src/client/mac/handle…
-
```
There are (at lest) two files in the repository that are not licensed under the
New BSD License like the web page and the LICENCE file states.
The files and licences are:
- src/client/mac/handle…
-
```
There are (at lest) two files in the repository that are not licensed under the
New BSD License like the web page and the LICENCE file states.
The files and licences are:
- src/client/mac/handle…
-
The fix for issue #54 unconditionally places an `OR` operator between all detected licenses from a `pom.xml` file, however there are cases where there is indeed ambiguity and the Maven conjunction rul…
-
### Description
I am scanning a textual version of https://licenses.nuget.org/BSD-3-Clause and I'm getting a proprietary-license hit!
### How To Reproduce
Scan Text File:
```
BSD 3-Clause "…
-
Before releasing v1.0.0 we have to make sure to have the licenses properly figured out.
The plan is to release the whole ViPErLEED package under "GPL v3 or later". We may also do dual licensing wit…
-
Module has a wrong SPDX identifier as the "license" field in "package.json".
According to [spdx list](https://spdx.org/licenses/) "BSD" is not a valid spdx identifier.
-
First of all, thanks for a great software!
Could you add the license field to package.json?
[license field in package.json | npm Documentation](https://docs.npmjs.com/files/package.json#license)
The…
-
Hi,
Since this repo seems to be very inactive, can I request for a change of license to BSD so that we can continue it on forked version, so that it will allow others to develop from its base witho…