On 06/03/2012 18:06, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> On 12-03-06 at 05:40pm, Jérémy Lal wrote:
>> On 06/03/2012 17:14, Felipe Sateler wrote:
>>> I might (hopefully...) have time to help, and I will need this. Is
>>> there any roadmap on what is missing to get an updated npm package?
>> There is :
>> * package dependencies that are in node_modules
>> * make sure the license is free (MIT +no-false-attribs)
>> I update regularly the collab-maint git repository, and
>> npm 1.1.4 package built from it is usable.
> Related to that: Please don't update in git the copyright_hints file if 
> changes not reflected in copyirhgt file.  The very point of that hints 
> file is to track changes.

In the case of npm, i intended to ignore changes in ./node_modules
since what's inside must be either reviewed or excluded from tarball.

I usually check all new files, and differences, manually.
I am not perfect at this, though.

> Also, please do not blindly bump format hint in first line of copyright 
> file.  License field is not allowed to contain spaces in final release 
> of the format.

Lintian warnings about copyright format let me naively think the syntax was
strictly checked...

> Oh, and that fork or Expat license seems to have a flaw: It is not clear 
> whether it talks only about the original author or any subsequent 
> author.  I would recommend upstream to not try hack legalese but instead 
> simply document clearly a friendly _request_ to do do same as now 
> codified in license.

I will forward that remark and recommandation to Isaac.
He's hard to convince for now.


Pkg-javascript-devel mailing list

Reply via email to