Add package union
#16
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add all versions of the `union` (https://www.npmjs.com/package/union) package as available under the MIT license. This is the license that is specified in its README and LICENSE file since v0.1.0. The only thing of note is that the licensee changed from "Nodejitsu Inc." in v0.4.3 and earlier to "Charlie Robbins & the Contributors" in v0.4.4 and later. Checked all versions of the package by creating an npm project with the following dependencies and reviewing the resulting `node_modules/` dir: "dependencies": { "union-0.6.0": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.5.0": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.4.6": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.4.5": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.4.4": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.4.3": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.4.2": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.4.1": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.4.0": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.3.8": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.3.7": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.3.6": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.3.5": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.3.4": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.3.3": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.3.2": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.3.0": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.2.1": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.2.0": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.1.8": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.1.7": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.1.6": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.1.5": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.1.4": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.1.3": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.1.2": "npm:[email protected]", "union-0.1.0": "npm:[email protected]" } I reviewed by checking all LICENSE files have the same text and that text matches the MIT license text (see note at the top). I also ran `fgrep -ir license .` inside the `node_modules/` dir (after removing the dirs of other dependencies) to look for additional license declarations but found none.
kemitchell
approved these changes
Dec 19, 2024
|
v1.9.0 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
README,LICENSE,COPYING, and header comments for conflicting or additional licenses.fgrep -ir license $PACKAGE_DIRECTORY.Add all versions of the
unionpackage as available under the MIT license. This is the license that is specified in its README and LICENSE file since v0.1.0. The only thing of note is that the licensee changed from "Nodejitsu Inc." in v0.4.3 and earlier to "Charlie Robbins & the Contributors" in v0.4.4 and later. For details on my process see the commit message of 7364db4.Related issues in the project's repository: