Closed mayorgatellez closed 9 years ago
Kinda rude to open bug reports all "this is a mistake! how dare you not do this!" :P
This line should (IIRC) have included the license in the sdist: https://github.com/bitprophet/releases/blob/9313de13d0df22c3857ec614a60f90a95801da0f/MANIFEST.in#L1
I just double checked and the local result of python setup.py sdist
is definitely including the LICENSE:
» python setup.py sdist
running sdist
...
reading manifest template 'MANIFEST.in'
...
hard linking LICENSE -> releases-0.7.0
...
Creating tar archive
removing 'releases-0.7.0' (and everything under it)
» ls dist
releases-0.7.0.tar.gz
» tar tzvf dist/releases-0.7.0.tar.gz | grep LICENSE
-rw-r--r-- 0 jforcier staff 1314 Jan 2 14:24 releases-0.7.0/LICENSE
Additionally, downloading the latest release from PyPI also appears to contain the LICENSE:
» pip install releases --download .
Collecting releases
Downloading releases-0.7.0.tar.gz
Saved ./releases-0.7.0.tar.gz
Successfully downloaded releases
» tar tzvf releases-0.7.0.tar.gz | grep LICENSE
-rw-r--r-- 0 jforcier staff 1314 Dec 31 2013 releases-0.7.0/LICENSE
» tar xzf releases-0.7.0.tar.gz
» head -n5 releases-0.7.0/LICENSE
Copyright (c) 2014, Jeff Forcier
All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:
If some older release is missing the LICENSE or if you can find another public copy that I was responsible for uploading, missing it, please let me know!
It's a mistake not to ship the LICENSE file in the released tarball--that makes it difficult or impossible for anyone to comply with their desired license terms.
I request this to you per Fedora Licensing Guidelines as I want to package this for the distribution. See: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/LicensingGuidelines#License_Text.