search

microsoft / DockerTools

Tools For Docker, including Visual Studio Provisioning and Publishing
Other
173 stars 26 forks source link

NuGet Package license is missing and the License URL is wrong #426

Closed cyclingJW closed 1 month ago

cyclingJW commented 2 months ago

"PackageId": "Microsoft.VisualStudio.Azure.Containers.Tools.Targets", "PackageVersion": "1.20.1", "PackageProjectUrl": "https://aka.ms/vscontainertools", "Copyright": "\u00A9 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.", "Authors": "Microsoft", "LicenseUrl": "https://aka.ms/deprecateLicenseUrl"

NCarlsonMSFT commented 2 months ago

Looking at the .nuspec file we are specifying license (licenseUrl is deprecated). The license is in EULA.md (available on the nuget.org listing)

cyclingJW commented 2 months ago

will you you type expression (MS-EULA) for the license property in near future instead of type file. It would then easier to check the license type? I would appreciate that.

fiveisprime commented 1 month ago

@cyclingJW I don't quite understand what you're looking for on this. Can you give me an idea of what you're trying to do with the license property? Maybe that will help me determine what's needed.

cyclingJW commented 1 month ago

@fiveisprime I try to explain what I mean. We are using a tool which is checking the licenses of the used NuGet packages. We take out the information inside a NuGet packages and store them in a json. It looks something like the following. { 14:29:24  [DBG] "PackageId": "Microsoft.SourceLink.GitLab", 14:29:24  [DBG] "PackageVersion": "8.0.0", 14:29:24  [DBG] "PackageProjectUrl": "https://github.com/dotnet/sourcelink", 14:29:24  [DBG] "Copyright": "\u00A9 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.", 14:29:24  [DBG] "Authors": "Microsoft", 14:29:24  [DBG] "License": "MIT", 14:29:24  [DBG] "LicenseUrl": "https://licenses.nuget.org/MIT", 14:29:24  [DBG] "LicenseInformationOrigin": 0 14:29:24  [DBG] }, 14:29:24  [DBG] { 14:29:24  [DBG] "PackageId": "Microsoft.VisualStudio.Azure.Containers.Tools.Targets", 14:29:24  [DBG] "PackageVersion": "1.20.1", 14:29:24  [DBG] "PackageProjectUrl": "", 14:29:24  [DBG] "Copyright": "", 14:29:24  [DBG] "Authors": "", 14:29:24  [DBG] "License": "MIT", 14:29:24  [DBG] "LicenseInformationOrigin": 4 14:29:24  [DBG] },

In case of the Container Tools we've to overwrite the license information because of the info on my first post with deprecatedUrl. The license for the package would be the MIT license as I can find it on this page on GitHub. My question would be, are you planning and provide the information inside the NuGet package as on an example Microsoft.SourceLink.GitLab does it (see above)? In that case, I do not have to overwrite the license information, because they are integrated in the NuGet package information.

fiveisprime commented 1 month ago

I get it now. Unfortunately, this repo doesn't represent the contents of the Container Tools package, which uses the Microsoft Software License, which doesn't have a valid expression for use in the manifest. This is why we link to the specific license in the license property. Nathan linked to our license above, you can view it here

The EULA.md that the license property points to is in the same directory though so you can use that for your automation.