search

fitzgen / glob-to-regexp

Convert a glob to a regular expression
152 stars 23 forks source link

Add LICENSE #19

Closed patricksmms closed 5 years ago

patricksmms commented 5 years ago

This license file should be in all the distributions of the source code in order to be valid. This also includes the npm module.

roccivic commented 5 years ago

License files should end in .txt and specify the license type, in the case BSD-2-Clause (E.g: https://github.com/roccivic/cron-converter/blob/master/LICENCE.txt).

I know you only copied from README.md, but even then it's not an exact copy.

Here the license is specified in package.json: https://github.com/fitzgen/glob-to-regexp/blob/master/package.json#L22. Is that not sufficient?

This license file should be in all the distributions of the source code in order to be valid.

You seem to tell people to add license files, like here, here and here. Do you have a source for this requirement?

patricksmms commented 5 years ago

License files should end in .txt and specify the license type, in the case BSD-2-Clause (E.g: https://github.com/roccivic/cron-converter/blob/master/LICENCE.txt).

I'm following a common practice (see https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/LICENSE, https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/master/LICENSE, https://github.com/openshift/origin/blob/master/LICENSE, ...). If you create a new GitHub repo and select to add a license, it creates a LICENSE file (see https://github.com/patricksmms/test123/blob/master/LICENSE). If for no other reason, this makes it easier for humans and scripts to identify them. Indeed, there are also many with the extention, for me it doesn't make much difference.

I know you only copied from README.md, but even then it's not an exact copy.

I did not copy from README.md, but instead from https://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-2-Clause

Here the license is specified in package.json: https://github.com/fitzgen/glob-to-regexp/blob/master/package.json#L22. Is that not sufficient?

I'm afraid it's not (told by layers). Also according to my understanding of the following line on the official BSD license:

  1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.

You seem to tell people to add license files, like here, here and here. Do you have a source for this requirement?

Yes. Please refer to my answer above.

I would rather not bother people with this, but unfortunately I can only use 3rd party dependencies that have compliant licenses. In other hand it's very easy for the authors to just merge this type of PR and even protects them against potential lawsuits. I see it as a win-win and hope you agree with me.

patricksmms commented 5 years ago

@roccivic, actually I think this module is fine as it has the complete license already on the README.md and that goes on the distributions, including npm. So in case you are really against having the LICENSE file, feel free to close this PR.

roccivic commented 5 years ago

Thanks for the explanation.

Let's not duplicate content. I'm going to close the PR as, like you said, the README already contains the full license text. If you think that having the LICENCE file is better, please amend the PR to remove the license text from the README file and I'll merge that.