Describe the bug
The netbox_ipcalculator repository does not contain a LICENSE file. As a result, users accessing the plugin on GitHub have no way of knowing the terms that apply to their use, redistribution, modification, or redistribution of derivative works of the code in this repository.
Check the repository code browser for a LICENSE file
Find no LICENSE file in evidence
Expected behavior
I expect to see a top-level LICENSE or LICENSE.md or LICENSE.txt file containing the text of a license of the author's choosing.
Screenshots
Not necessary
Additional context
I love what you've built, as my mental subnet calculator has always been unreliable. Hi there, I'm the product manager for NetBox Open Source at NetBox Labs. One of our customers has expressed an interest in this plugin being considered for inclusion in a certification program soon to be announced. One of the program criteria is that candidate plugins be distributed under an OSI-approved license. I'm guessing this is an oversight since the plugin's PyPI entry indicates that it's under Apache-2.0. If you prefer to discuss off GitHub, please DM me on NetDev Slack.
Plugin version 1.1
NetBox version 3.7.3
Describe the bug The
netbox_ipcalculator
repository does not contain aLICENSE
file. As a result, users accessing the plugin on GitHub have no way of knowing the terms that apply to their use, redistribution, modification, or redistribution of derivative works of the code in this repository.To Reproduce Steps to reproduce the behavior:
LICENSE
fileLICENSE
file in evidenceExpected behavior I expect to see a top-level
LICENSE
orLICENSE.md
orLICENSE.txt
file containing the text of a license of the author's choosing.Screenshots Not necessary
Additional context I love what you've built, as my mental subnet calculator has always been unreliable. Hi there, I'm the product manager for NetBox Open Source at NetBox Labs. One of our customers has expressed an interest in this plugin being considered for inclusion in a certification program soon to be announced. One of the program criteria is that candidate plugins be distributed under an OSI-approved license. I'm guessing this is an oversight since the plugin's PyPI entry indicates that it's under Apache-2.0. If you prefer to discuss off GitHub, please DM me on NetDev Slack.