Shouldn't rails.gemspec include the MIT-LICENSE file in the specification files?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Shouldn't rails.gemspec include the MIT-LICENSE file in the specification files?

mikong
The rails.gemspec only has the README in the Gem Specification's files:

s.files = ["README.md"]

Some projects include every document file or markdown file in the project's root directory to this setting. I don't think that's necessary, but usually the changelog, readme and license should be there. For rails gem, there's no changelog which makes sense but we do have the MIT-LICENSE file.

I can create a PR for this but the Contributing guideline mention it doesn't generally accept changes that "do not add anything substantial to the stability, functionality or testability of Rails".

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rubyonrails-talk/2a069edb-50c5-42cf-bb42-7a3de68abaae%40googlegroups.com.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Shouldn't rails.gemspec include the MIT-LICENSE file in the specification files?

San Ji
You do realize that this is not the rails-core group, where people talk about the development of rails framework, right?

If you want to convince them I suggest preparing some court cases where not including the MIT license file in the package bundle is an issue.

Good luck

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [hidden email].
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rubyonrails-talk/a8490bba-c734-4843-adc5-52a593fae9de%40googlegroups.com.