starred/radzen-blazor
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/radzenhq/radzen-blazor.git synced 2026-02-04 05:35:44 +00:00
Code Issues 1.3k Packages Projects Releases 22 Wiki Activity

Use PackageLicenseExpression instead of PackageLicenseFile #1282

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-01-29 17:51:33 +00:00 by claunia · 1 comment
claunia commented 2026-01-29 17:51:33 +00:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @vincentscode on GitHub (Jul 2, 2024).

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
The Radzen.Blazor package uses an embedded license file instead of a license expression. This makes it hard to filter automatically; therefore, we have to approve each version manually to ensure no license change occurred.

Describe the solution you'd like
Since Radzen.Blazor uses the MIT license, the package could use a PackageLicenseExpression instead of a PackageLicenseFile to convey its licensing. This is recommended when using one of the supported licenses (https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/reference/nuspec#license) and would make automatically approving this package's license possible. The License would also be directly visible on nuget instead of an opaque link to a license file.

Originally created by @vincentscode on GitHub (Jul 2, 2024). **Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.** The Radzen.Blazor package uses an embedded license file instead of a license expression. This makes it hard to filter automatically; therefore, we have to approve each version manually to ensure no license change occurred. **Describe the solution you'd like** Since Radzen.Blazor uses the MIT license, the package could use a `PackageLicenseExpression` instead of a `PackageLicenseFile` to convey its licensing. This is recommended when using one of the supported licenses (https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/reference/nuspec#license) and would make automatically approving this package's license possible. The License would also be directly visible on nuget instead of an opaque link to a license file.
claunia commented 2026-01-29 17:51:34 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@akorchev commented on GitHub (Jul 2, 2024):

We would accept a PR with the proposed change.

@akorchev commented on GitHub (Jul 2, 2024): We would accept a PR with the proposed change.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
enhancement
good first issue
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
No Label
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
claunia
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/radzen-blazor#1282
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?