4 ms·
You should also check for the existence of a package.json file at the root, which is the Node.js style. These files can contain licensing information for Node m
by NathanKP 14y ago
You should also check for the existence of a package.json file at the root, which is the Node.js style. These files can contain licensing information for Node modules and projects, and personally I think this is a better pattern than making a separate LICENSE file.
- niggler 14y agoI don't disagree, but that's only applicable for node.js code. There's no tradition of using package.json for fortran or C. Although I do like the overall theme of developing a language-agnostic way of indicating licenses (because, as also mentioned by jcr, checking for LICENSE doesn't cut it)
- nevir 14y agoIs that legally binding? Many licenses have an explicit clause that they are to be duplicated with the source. Here's the clause from the MIT License, for example: > The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.