Replace <PackageLicenseFile> with <PackageLicenseExpression>#32
Conversation
Because an embedded license file is used instead of an SPDX tag, automated tools like [nuget-license](https://github.com/tomchavakis/nuget-license) and [packageguard](https://github.com/dennisdoomen/packageguard) are unable to detect this package's license. Also the license does not show up in the package's metadata in nuget. [Packing a license expression or a license file ](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/reference/msbuild-targets#packing-a-license-expression-or-a-license-file) recommends that MIT-licensed packages should have `<PackageLicenseExpression>MIT</PackageLicenseExpression>` instead of referring to a file. The `License.md` file can still remain in the package, just the metadata would change.
|
Closing and reopening the PR to see if the required |
|
@buvinghausen Can you go to this repo's branch protection settings and fix the issue? A check named |
|
Hey, something must have resolved. I just now had a button to approve this PR to build, and a workflow has started. |
|
Looks like the main branch is not building. I'll try to get that fixed. |
|
I fixed CI at #33. We're just waiting for @buvinghausen now because I took some liberties in that PR to reduce the doc burden, but I'll wait for him to confirm before it merges. Then this PR will be unblocked. |
|
Thanks @michael-wolfenden! |
|
@jnm2 Will there be a new package released? |
|
That's up to @buvinghausen I think! |
|
@jnm2 I thought I made you a collaborator both here and on nuget but let me kick the tires and do a release |
|
Also sorry for the delays but unfortunately my current job has me on Azure DevOps so I don't sign into GitHub nearly as often |
3 participants
Because an embedded license file is used instead of an SPDX tag, automated tools like nuget-license and packageguard are unable to detect this package's license. Also the license does not show up in the package's metadata in nuget.
Packing a license expression or a license file
recommends that MIT-licensed packages should have
<PackageLicenseExpression>MIT</PackageLicenseExpression>instead of referring to a file.The
License.mdfile can still remain in the package, just the metadata would change.