- 
                Notifications
    You must be signed in to change notification settings 
- Fork 11
Open
Description
The license field of package.json is MIT, but Apache-2.0 is defined in the LICENSE file.
Now this usually wouldn't matter, since the licenses are similar (for the most part). But tools like pnpm-licenses partially misinterpret the license to be MIT.
I don't know how much of a legal issue this is, since I've found packages like through that use both. But it just seems like sloppy to me.
Example:
- Create a new npm project
- Install pnpm
- Run pnpm i @pkgjs/parseargs
- Run npx pnpm-licenses list -o ./licenses.json
- View the licenses.jsonfile.
Result:
[
    {
        "name": "@pkgjs/parseargs",
        "license": "MIT", // Incorrect
        "author": "",
        "homepage": "https://github.com/pkgjs/parseargs#readme",
        "description": "Polyfill of future proposal for `util.parseArgs()`",
        "version": "0.11.0",
        "licenseText": "Apache License\n Version 2.0, January 2004... You get the idea" // Correct
    }
]Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
No labels