Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Update cryptico library license property in package.json #12640

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 2, 2020
Merged

Update cryptico library license property in package.json #12640

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 2, 2020

Conversation

sashberd
Copy link
Contributor

cc #5500
According to:
wwwtyro/cryptico#11 (comment)

Pull request for issue: #5500
Related issue(s): # #

Checklist for Pull request or lib adding request issue follows the conventions.

Auto-update checklist

  • Has valid tags for each versions (for git auto-update)
  • Auto-update setup
  • Auto-update target/source is valid.
  • Auto-update filemap is correct.

Git commit checklist

  • The first line of commit message is less then 50 chars; clean, clear and easy to understand.
  • The parent of the commit(s) in the PR is not older than 3 days.
  • Pull request is sent from a non-master branch with a meaningful name.
  • Separate unrelated changes into different commits.
  • Use rebase to squash/fixup dummy/unnecessary commits into only one commit.
  • Close corresponding issue in commit message
  • Mention related issue(s), people in commit message, comment.

@ghost ghost assigned sashberd Mar 25, 2018
@ghost ghost added the in progress label Mar 25, 2018
@sashberd sashberd requested review from Billy4195 and removed request for dakshshah96 March 25, 2018 09:11
PeterBot
PeterBot approved these changes Mar 25, 2018
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@PeterBot PeterBot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@sashberd congratulations! 809ce4f CI test passed! ✅
Please wait for the further review from the maintainers!

For the details 📃, please take a look at ➡️ https://ci.cdnjs.com/cdnjs/cdnjs/19162, thank you 😀

PeterDaveHello
PeterDaveHello suggested changes Mar 29, 2018
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@PeterDaveHello PeterDaveHello left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The reference says LGPL-2.1, and seems to be not confirmed? Point me if I'm wrong, thanks.

@sashberd sashberd requested a review from PeterDaveHello April 1, 2018 06:48
@sashberd
Copy link
Contributor Author

sashberd commented Apr 1, 2018

@PeterDaveHello You are right. I updated the license
Also please help me to finish #11847. Thanks

@sashberd sashberd force-pushed the update_cryptico_license branch from 809ce4f to dffb263 Compare April 1, 2018 06:50
PeterBot
PeterBot approved these changes Apr 1, 2018
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@PeterBot PeterBot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@sashberd congratulations! dffb263 CI test passed! ✅
Please wait for the further review from the maintainers!

For the details 📃, please take a look at ➡️ https://ci.cdnjs.com/cdnjs/cdnjs/19350, thank you 😀

@PeterDaveHello PeterDaveHello removed their request for review April 3, 2018 04:22
PeterDaveHello
PeterDaveHello reviewed Apr 3, 2018
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@PeterDaveHello PeterDaveHello left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I didn't see any reliable reference here.

@sashberd
Copy link
Contributor Author

sashberd commented Apr 3, 2018

The reference in the PR description is not enough?

@PeterDaveHello
Copy link
Contributor

@sashberd I didn't see any trivial point, not sure if I missed it.
@cdnjs/maintainer would you like to take a look? Thanks.

@extend1994
Copy link
Contributor

extend1994 commented Apr 19, 2018 •
edited
Loading

wwwtyro/cryptico#11 (comment) is a wrong response as wwwtyro/cryptico#11 (comment) said. I guess it's The Unlicense because his some other works take this kind of license.

@sashberd
Copy link
Contributor Author

@PeterDaveHello @extend1994 Should I use Unlicense in config?

@sashberd sashberd requested review from MattIPv4 and xtuc and removed request for extend1994, sufuf3 and Billy4195 February 25, 2020 19:53
@sashberd
Copy link
Contributor Author

@xtuc @MattIPv4 Should we continue to update libs licences like we did in the past?

@xtuc
Copy link
Member

xtuc commented Feb 29, 2020

@sashberd I don't feel strongly about changing or not licences but I'm not a lawyer.

MattIPv4
MattIPv4 approved these changes Mar 2, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@MattIPv4 MattIPv4 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Lgtm.

@MattIPv4 MattIPv4 merged commit 9949ea8 into cdnjs:master Mar 2, 2020
@sashberd sashberd deleted the update_cryptico_license branch March 3, 2020 07:48
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@PeterDaveHello PeterDaveHello PeterDaveHello requested changes

@PeterBot PeterBot PeterBot approved these changes

@MattIPv4 MattIPv4 MattIPv4 approved these changes

@xtuc xtuc xtuc approved these changes

Assignees

@sashberd sashberd

Labels
in progress
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
6 participants
@sashberd @PeterDaveHello @extend1994 @xtuc @MattIPv4 @PeterBot