Proper pub points not given

dart-lang / pub-dev

The pub.dev website

https://pub.dev

BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License

785 stars 147 forks source link

Proper pub points not given #7129

Open quetool opened 1 year ago

quetool commented 1 year ago

URL: https://pub.dev/packages/web3modal_flutter/versions/3.0.0-beta04

Hello, on the package linked above☝️ there is a proper LICENSE file filled with an OSI-approved License however it's not being recognized as such.

quetool commented 1 year ago

We can see how dio_cache_interceptor package is using the very same LICENSE as we do but it's being recognized properly for them but not for our package https://pub.dev/packages/dio_cache_interceptor/license

quetool commented 1 year ago

Only after hitting documentation points on latest version the license was recognized. Not sure if it's a bug or not but IMHO license recognition should be independent from documentation analysis.

https://pub.dev/packages/web3modal_flutter/versions/3.0.0-beta04/score

https://pub.dev/packages/web3modal_flutter/versions/3.0.0-beta06/score

isoos commented 1 year ago

@quetool: thanks for reporting! A few notes:

license recognition is independent from documentation generation, although both happen as an analysis/worker step (and subject to change over time as we upgrade our dependent libraries)
license detection is not an exact science, small difference may change the meaning of the license in significant ways, we rely on similarity threshold to match common license texts
you did change the license in a non-insignificant way to pass the detection: https://github.com/WalletConnect/Web3ModalFlutter/commit/75761ab5cfc9a9d627283ed291d7e8e6bc4842fb#diff-c693279643b8cd5d248172d9c22cb7cf4ed163a3c98c8a3f69c2717edd3eacb7 I've filed https://github.com/dart-lang/pana/issues/1268 for later investigation

quetool commented 1 year ago

Thanks for answering @isoos ! Indeed I figured "hey, maybe the appendix is important for the recognition tool" and I added it, although I would have never said it :) Didn't know it was that important

isoos commented 1 year ago

It is not the appendix that is important, rather, overall, the difference from the "canonical" (or one of the many canonical) text content. Putting the appendix back moved the license over the (otherwise strict) detection threshold. It is important to report these issues, otherwise fixing these won't get a high priority in the near future...