Skip to content

.NET EULA license in some text-only packages #2560

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
omajid opened this issue Oct 22, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by dotnet/source-build-reference-packages#291
Closed

.NET EULA license in some text-only packages #2560

omajid opened this issue Oct 22, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by dotnet/source-build-reference-packages#291
Assignees
Labels
area-prebuilts Reducing the number of prebuilt packages in the tarball

Comments

@omajid
Copy link
Member

omajid commented Oct 22, 2021

Some text-only packages have a licenseUrl that points to the .NET EULA, not MIT:

$ git rev-parse HEAD
7828a7f0f073a6d59e04ddd970d16383a4dbab75

$ ag _eula_ artifacts/tarball/
[...]
artifacts/tarball/packages/text-only/microsoft.dotnet.common.itemtemplates/1.0.2-beta3/microsoft.dotnet.common.itemtemplates.nuspec
9:    <licenseUrl>https://www.microsoft.com/web/webpi/eula/net_library_eula_enu.htm</licenseUrl>

artifacts/tarball/packages/text-only/microsoft.dotnet.common.projecttemplates.2.1/1.0.2-beta3/microsoft.dotnet.common.projecttemplates.2.1.nuspec
9:    <licenseUrl>https://www.microsoft.com/web/webpi/eula/net_library_eula_enu.htm</licenseUrl>

This is (was?) already fixed in dotnet/source-build-reference-packages#240, so I am not sure where these files are coming from.

cc @dseefeld @crummel @MichaelSimons @lbussell

@ghost ghost added the untriaged label Oct 22, 2021
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Oct 22, 2021

I couldn't figure out the best area label to add to this issue. If you have write-permissions please help me learn by adding exactly one area label.

@dseefeld
Copy link
Contributor

dseefeld commented Oct 25, 2021

This is a bug in source-build. The 2 packages in question should be coming from SBRP instead of being included in the tarball with the dynamic text-only package generation. Both of these pacakges should be added under MIT license as a reference-package in SBRP. One is there already.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area-prebuilts Reducing the number of prebuilt packages in the tarball
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants