Open bsutton opened 1 year ago
I've noticed that we have a number of recent packages published to pub.dev that are missing their readme's.
Right now having a readme is not a strict requirement on pub.dev
: pub
client will warn you when it is missing, and the layout score may suffer too, but otherwise we accept the package upload.
It's interesting to note that in a number of the investigated cases the tar for prior versions contained a readme.
At the moment pub.dev
display only the README.md
as the generic documentation file for the package. In the past we had more choice, like readme.txt
was also displayed if present, and we did not retroactively remove those from the UI (or from the database). So there may be packages where which have been using a different file pattern, and recent version does not display it, while prior versions do.
I think we should make a readme file a requirement for publishing.
I've noticed that we have a number of recent packages published to pub.dev that are missing their readme's.
On examination of a few packages, it would appear that the readme is missing from the uploaded tar. It's interesting to note that in a number of the investigated cases the tar for prior versions contained a readme.
This leaves me to suspect that the client 'dart pub' command is failing to package the readme into the tar in some cases.
The following packages have been identified. This is from a query on our system but the ones where I've investigated the problem appear to originate on pub.dev (we pull the readmes from the tar).
While many of these are old, the problem has also occurred in the last few days: