[types] Add LICENSE files #23162
[types] Add LICENSE files #23162
Conversation
oliviertassinari
changed the title
oliviertassinari
added
package: types
oliviertassinari
force-pushed
the
Copy-LICENSE-file-to-packages
branch
from
ac9f453 to
2e5c26f
Compare
scripts/copy-files.js
Outdated
| ...(packageDataOther.main | ||
| ? { | ||
| main: './node/index.js', | ||
| module: './index.js', | ||
| } | ||
| : {}), | ||
| types: './index.d.ts', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How the these changes relate to the LICENSE of @material-ui/types?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
- there are no
mainnormodulesentries in the package.json for@material-ui/types typingshould betypesto match the convention.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
there are no main nor modules entries in the package.json for @material-ui/types
Right, we run this script on types now. Really which we would've just copied the LICENSE file instead of touching build infra.
typing should be types to match the convention.
These are equivalent as per https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/declaration-files/publishing.html. What convetion do you mean?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Right, we run this script on types now. Really which we would've just copied the LICENSE file instead of touching build infra.
We could do that too. It was the initial proposal of @lielfr. But I think that he went too far, he added the LICENSE file in all the packages which aren't necessary.
What convetion do you mean?
The motivation was to consolidate on a single name for the field, avoiding to use two different names.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Legal is just annoying 😄 Let me rebase and then we can get this in.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll simplify the main/module juggling later. There's a better, conventional approach for it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm sorry, it probably would have been better if I'd asked first about the desired way to implement it. Just thought that only copying the file to the types module isn't worth a PR by itself.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just thought that only copying the file to the types module isn't worth a PR by itself.
Any change is worth a PR. Don't ever get discouraged by how minor a change might be perceived.
github-actions
bot
added
PR: out-of-date
eps1lon
force-pushed
the
Copy-LICENSE-file-to-packages
branch
from
8fb7888 to
3f28ad9
Compare
|
@lielfr It's a great first pull request on Material-UI 👌🏻. Thank you for working on it! |
This is a pretty straightforward PR. Started with the types package because of issue #23047 and copied the LICENSE file from the root directory of the repository to every package which didn't have one already.Hopefully this will fix that issue.
Edit by @oliviertassinari
Closes #23047