@devcurmudgeon FWIW, the license choices available for use in Python packages metadata are listed here: https://pypi.python.org/pypi?:action=list_classifiers and correctness is enforced when uploading to Pypi. This package declares itself as using both the MIT and the Python licenses.

@jaraco you wrote:

The main reason I wanted not to maintain the metadata and a separate license file was to reduce the number of places the license is indicated to limit the possibility of confusion or inconsistency.

The metadata approach is fine. Now I have two remarks:

your downstream users are automatically not compliant with the licenses because the code you redistribute does not contain the license texts proper which is an essential condition of the MIT and Python licenses themselves. (See https://enterprise.dejacode.com/license_library/Demo/python/#license-conditions )
as a side note --as you may know-- wheels have very limited provisions to include extra license texts (e.g. a single text file in the METADATA using a setup.cfg entry) and do not honor MANIFEST.in entries ... See https://bitbucket.org/pypa/wheel/issues/138/include-more-than-one-license-file-or ... This eventually makes a wheel subject to the same issue as described in 1. even if you were to include the MIT and Python license texts in an sdist
on SPDX license ids in general and Pypi Trove classifiers: the trove classifiers are not perfect as they are, but updating them is done elsewhere and not here. That said, using them instead of or in addition to the current classifiers would likely be a major step forward. SPDX ids have been adopted by NPMs and Ruby FWIW.

I guess I/we should start working on a PEP towards this.
@devcurmudgeon Are you interested by this? We could ask @jaraco to possibly sponsor us for this PEP?
This is not a huge amount of work, but this will likely prove to be controversial and subject to lengthy discussions.

@devcurmudgeon @jaraco Finally the latest https://github.com/nexB/scancode-toolkit/ develop detects these alright (I just pushed a few extra detection rules to make sure this was the case).

@devcurmudgeon the correct license is not just MIT but MIT and Python.

Uh oh!

What licence applies for this project, please? #263

Description

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Relationships

Development

Issue actions