Update licenseUrl to MIT license for reference-packages #701
Conversation
| nuspecContent = nuspecContent.Replace("http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=529443", MicrosoftMitLicenseUrl); | ||
| nuspecContent = nuspecContent.Replace("http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=329770", MicrosoftMitLicenseUrl); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a reason we don't just replace all of the content in<licenseUrl>*</licenseUrl> instead of just these specific fwlinks?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My understanding of the agreement is that old FX packages that are Microsoft licensed can be updated to MIT. @leecow to confirm.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you mean "can't be updated"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you mean "can't be updated"?
No - They can be updated to MIT. That is what this change is doing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe this is true but would need @richlander to confirm.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm trying to grasp the scope of this. There are a lot of packages here. I looked at Microsoft.Build.Framework. It is MIT, so changing to MIT seems like a correction rather than needing an agreement. Are there some packages that are not MIT?
It seems like getting issues created for packages that are not MIT is the correct path. Yes?
Also, we should move off of licenceUrl to licenseExpression.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There are a lot of packages here. I looked at Microsoft.Build.Framework. It is MIT, so changing to MIT seems like a correction rather than needing an agreement.
The following packages being updated in this PR fall into this category which is older versions are Microsoft licensed while the latest versions are MIT.
- microsoft.build.framework/15.1.1012 -
- microsoft.build.framework/16.0.461
- microsoft.build.utilities.core/15.1.1012
- microsoft.build.utilities.core/16.0.461
- system.composition.attributedmodel/1.0.31
- system.composition.convention/1.0.31
- system.composition.hosting/1.0.31
- system.composition.runtime/1.0.31
- system.composition.typedparts/1.0.31
- system.text.encoding.codepages/4.3.0
- microsoft.codeanalysis.common/2.9.0
- microsoft.codeanalysis.csharp/2.9.0
The following packages are older packages that aren't being produced anymore and do not have a newer version that is MIT licensed
- system.diagnostics.stacktrace/4.3.0
- system.runtime/4.3.1
- system.runtime.extensions/4.3.1
- system.text.regularexpressions/4.3.1
- system.threading.tasks.parallel/4.3.0
- system.valuetuple/4.3.0
- system.xml.xpath/4.3.0
- system.xml.xpath.xdocument/4.3.0
- netstandard.library/1.6.1
It seems like getting issues created for packages that are not MIT is the correct path.
That would require republishing the packages which would have to be a new version though wouldn't it? This is the reason for this manual update.
Also, we should move off of licenceUrl to licenseExpression.
I generally agree but for the purpose of this repo, we would like to mirror how the original nuspec is defined as much as possible.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the detailed info.
Per agreement reached in the past, the reference packages should have an MIT license.