-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
Verify searched license locations #4
Comments
@danbev seems the current module we are using to search licenses, has some limitations related
the result is only:
|
@helio-frota Great, exactly what we wanted to find out. We can either take a look at an alternative existing license search implementation or perhaps we should write our own for our specific needs. Would you be willing to take a look if there are any other license searching options out there that might fit our needs, and if there are none create an issue for this. We can still make progress on other issue I think but this would be the highest priority one I think. |
@danbev yah sounds good . |
The tool can find the license from But still not showing the -> Maybe <- we can add this property on resulting json, assuming that: "when no licenseFile, and *, then means the license was found on README" |
Also, I'm going to try to make some workaround related to the "Find -> found - > stop searching" behavior.
not only one place. |
here we have README on licenseFile: sample output:
|
we need to solve 1 remaining thing: to show all license file locations, and not only one file license location. With the small previous change, when the package.json has |
"This task should verify that all the following locations are searched for licence files:" This means, only to search, I mean to guarantee that it was searched, or means to output also ? if this is |
I only head verifying in mind and that we'd create a new issue for anything that we discover is missing, like you have done. Like you said we should probably send a PR upstream and also create a new task so that we can extract the contents of the licence in the README. This is needed because at the moment the entire README will be include in the xml element. Does that make sense? |
this PR covers this task with some tests: |
This task should verify that all the following locations are searched for licence files:
This should be done be creating a unit test and a mock/dummy project with licenses in the above mentioned locations.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: