On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 2:35 AM Ralf Gommers <ralf.gomm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 6:42 AM Charles R Harris < > charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Dec 9, 2020 at 5:17 PM Charles R Harris < >> charlesr.har...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> Currently we append appropriate platform licenses to the LICENSE.txt >>> file when building wheels for release. This means that there are >>> uncommitted changes which shows up in the versioneer version as 'dirty', >>> see the nightly files. This is unfortunate, but accurate :) There are at >>> least two possible solutions to this problem. >>> >>> 1. Patch versioneer to omit the dirty string, very easy to do. >>> 2. Put the platform specific file in the repo or combine them in the >>> LICENSE file. >>> >>> I don't recall why we did things the way we do, but there was a >>> discussion. Patching is easy, but the second option seems preferable. In >>> particular, folks who now build their own NumPy wheels aren't going to have >>> the license files. >>> >> > The reason for that construct is that GitHub won't recognize the license > if we add vendored info. As a result, it would not only not display the > license in its UI, but also it provides an API to query the license for a > repo which then gives the wrong result. That in turn throws off Tidelift, > which uses two sources of licensing info in its service (GitHub and > libraries.io) and those should match. > > Please consider this an issue with versioneer, and choose (1) > > Note that LICENSES_bundled.txt, excluded from the sdist in MANIFEST.in, is >> included in the wheel in the dist-info file. >> > > Ah, that needs fixing then. > > Seems setup can be called with an option to use MANIFEST.in, I'll experiment a bit. Since the bundled license is only included in `dist-info` it may also be a bug in setuptools. Chuck
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
