Closed decathorpe closed 1 year ago
@decathorpe Pull request that adds proper LICENSE-MIT
and LICENSE-APACHE
files is welcome.
Do I need to create another tag/version with just the licence files changes?
Having the license file in the git repo would be enough for me to reference it, but having a new release would be even better. 👍🏼
Released 0.4.2 with the licence file fix.
Thank you! 👍🏼
Hi! I'm working on packaging this crate for Fedora Linux since it is a new dependency of eza (a maintained exa fork). During technical review, we noticed that this crate's metadata states that the license is "MIT/Apache-2.0", but the license text only contains the MIT license.
Please also include a copy of the Apache-2.0 license text (the idiomatic way to handle this in Rust crates seems to be to have both
LICENSE-MIT
andLICENSE-APACHE
files). Both the MIT and the Apache-2.0 license require redistributed sources to contain a copy of the license text, so the missing license text is currently preventing us from packaging eza.