search

jozefizso / generator-license

Yeoman Generator - License
MIT License
59 stars 20 forks source link

Add more licenses #14

Closed amingilani closed 7 years ago

amingilani commented 9 years ago

This does more than fix #12 and fix #13

Adds the license files:

  1. GPL3
  2. GPL2
  3. LGPL2
  4. LGPL3
  5. AGPL3
  6. WTFPL

I have not written the tests though, since I have a day job, and I thought quickly fixing this would be nice, but I encourage someone to write them? Pretty please? Also, these are untested.

hutson commented 9 years ago

:+1:

jozefizso commented 9 years ago

Please, include tests for new licenses.

canercandan commented 9 years ago

:+1:

SBoudrias commented 8 years ago

Are all these licenses very common? I feel we should probably limit the choices to well known common licenses. I wouldn't want the end user to be overwhelm by a tons of choices.

hutson commented 8 years ago

So a few issues here. First, multiple versions of a license. Should only the latest iteration of a license be supported? Second, if limiting the total number of licenses, should a custom license option be provided that allows the user to input license information?

SBoudrias commented 8 years ago

Second, if limiting the total number of licenses, should a custom license option be provided that allows the user to input license information?

It'd be possible to add a "more" option and then show an extensive list of licenses.

iamstarkov commented 8 years ago

I would rather create new generator-license-extended based on current one. This generator will be simple as it is now. Someone who needs more licenses to choose from, will use new extended generator. What do you think?

ek9 commented 7 years ago

Otherwise, I decided to comment regarding other licenses:

Regarding 2.0 versions of GPL/LGPL: I don't believe they are necessary as any new projects are more recommended to be started with 3.0 or later version. This is even included in the updated licenses as they state themselves, that user can choose to use newer version at their own discretion, even if project is started with 2.0 version of license.

WTFPL, while it can be considered a form of licensing, it isn't really used often (or in a serious projects), so I wouldn't say it adds much having it in the generator.

This leaves with:

This list is based on licenses listed at https://opensource.org/licenses (which are licenses that comply with Open Source Definition)

@jozefizso let me know what you think.I could:

  1. issue a PR for LGPL 3.0.With LGPL 3.0 would then have all the licenses from choosealicense.com
  2. issue a PR for ( Eclipse Public License 1.0 & CDDL 1.0 if you think it would be worth including it. With Eclipse & CDDL we would have all OSD compatible licenses from https://opensource.org/licenses

This would make most popular and open-source approved licenses available in the generator.

ek9 commented 7 years ago

I've made a separate issue so it's possible to discuss it (and it's likely where it can be found by others). As a lot of the licenses were already merged, I'd suggest to close this PR.

millette commented 7 years ago

@ek9 is referring to #45