mirror of
https://code.forgejo.org/actions/setup-node.git
synced 2025-05-21 13:34:46 +00:00
.
This commit is contained in:
parent
a004f0ae58
commit
fc725ba36b
7280 changed files with 19 additions and 1796407 deletions
113
node_modules/validate-npm-package-license/README.md
generated
vendored
113
node_modules/validate-npm-package-license/README.md
generated
vendored
|
@ -1,113 +0,0 @@
|
|||
validate-npm-package-license
|
||||
============================
|
||||
|
||||
Give me a string and I'll tell you if it's a valid npm package license string.
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
var valid = require('validate-npm-package-license');
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
SPDX license identifiers are valid license strings:
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
|
||||
var assert = require('assert');
|
||||
var validSPDXExpression = {
|
||||
validForNewPackages: true,
|
||||
validForOldPackages: true,
|
||||
spdx: true
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
assert.deepEqual(valid('MIT'), validSPDXExpression);
|
||||
assert.deepEqual(valid('BSD-2-Clause'), validSPDXExpression);
|
||||
assert.deepEqual(valid('Apache-2.0'), validSPDXExpression);
|
||||
assert.deepEqual(valid('ISC'), validSPDXExpression);
|
||||
```
|
||||
The function will return a warning and suggestion for nearly-correct license identifiers:
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
assert.deepEqual(
|
||||
valid('Apache 2.0'),
|
||||
{
|
||||
validForOldPackages: false,
|
||||
validForNewPackages: false,
|
||||
warnings: [
|
||||
'license should be ' +
|
||||
'a valid SPDX license expression (without "LicenseRef"), ' +
|
||||
'"UNLICENSED", or ' +
|
||||
'"SEE LICENSE IN <filename>"',
|
||||
'license is similar to the valid expression "Apache-2.0"'
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
);
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
SPDX expressions are valid, too ...
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
// Simple SPDX license expression for dual licensing
|
||||
assert.deepEqual(
|
||||
valid('(GPL-3.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)'),
|
||||
validSPDXExpression
|
||||
);
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
... except if they contain `LicenseRef`:
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
var warningAboutLicenseRef = {
|
||||
validForOldPackages: false,
|
||||
validForNewPackages: false,
|
||||
spdx: true,
|
||||
warnings: [
|
||||
'license should be ' +
|
||||
'a valid SPDX license expression (without "LicenseRef"), ' +
|
||||
'"UNLICENSED", or ' +
|
||||
'"SEE LICENSE IN <filename>"',
|
||||
]
|
||||
};
|
||||
|
||||
assert.deepEqual(
|
||||
valid('LicenseRef-Made-Up'),
|
||||
warningAboutLicenseRef
|
||||
);
|
||||
|
||||
assert.deepEqual(
|
||||
valid('(MIT OR LicenseRef-Made-Up)'),
|
||||
warningAboutLicenseRef
|
||||
);
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If you can't describe your licensing terms with standardized SPDX identifiers, put the terms in a file in the package and point users there:
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
assert.deepEqual(
|
||||
valid('SEE LICENSE IN LICENSE.txt'),
|
||||
{
|
||||
validForNewPackages: true,
|
||||
validForOldPackages: true,
|
||||
inFile: 'LICENSE.txt'
|
||||
}
|
||||
);
|
||||
|
||||
assert.deepEqual(
|
||||
valid('SEE LICENSE IN license.md'),
|
||||
{
|
||||
validForNewPackages: true,
|
||||
validForOldPackages: true,
|
||||
inFile: 'license.md'
|
||||
}
|
||||
);
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If there aren't any licensing terms, use `UNLICENSED`:
|
||||
|
||||
```javascript
|
||||
var unlicensed = {
|
||||
validForNewPackages: true,
|
||||
validForOldPackages: true,
|
||||
unlicensed: true
|
||||
};
|
||||
assert.deepEqual(valid('UNLICENSED'), unlicensed);
|
||||
assert.deepEqual(valid('UNLICENCED'), unlicensed);
|
||||
```
|
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue