Steve Jorgensen wrote: > Ian Stapleton Cordasco wrote: > > Forgive me if I'm missing something but doesn't > > license-file provides this > > functionality (see https://stackoverflow.com/a/48691876) for > > an example. > > I surmise not enough people use it although it's readily available? > > Apparently, it was me who was missing something. It looks like many or > > possibly > most of the packages we are using actually do contain license files. I guess > I originally > thought that none did because the first couple of packages that I inspected > when > originally setting up our process did not.
Looking at the files installed for Django 2.2.10 as an example, I see that there is a LICENSE.txt file in the Django-2.2.10.dist-info directory, but there is no metadata in the installation indicating that it is the license file. The setup.cfg file in the Django source code repo does not include a `license_files =` entry. Looking at psycopg2 2.8.4 as another example, there is a LICENSE file in the psycopg2-2.8.4.dist-info directory, but again there is no metadata indicating that this is the license file. In the source code repository for psycopg2, there is a `license_file = LICENSE` entry in setup.cfg (supposed to be `license_files =` ?) but there is nothing in the distribution to reflect that. I suppose for packages like these that do include license files, I can look for files named things like LICENSE.*, COPYING.*, etc. but it would be nice if there was something in the metadata for the installed package that specifically points to the license file(s). -- Distutils-SIG mailing list -- distutils-sig@python.org To unsubscribe send an email to distutils-sig-le...@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/distutils-sig.python.org/ Message archived at https://mail.python.org/archives/list/distutils-sig@python.org/message/43TEGXFIHDOBLCYCGW4UIKLGVXMVWM6F/
