-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 80
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
Check what packages will be dropped from package sets #250
Comments
Still cleaning up the implementation a bit, but here's the initial list of packages that will currently be dropped from the package set:
(I'll expand the error messages to make it clearer what error would result in them being dropped) |
Cleaned up the script (purescript/registry#266) and here is the more detailed output:
|
I think there's some additional noise in the output due to #267. I put a temporary fix in place and was able to narrow down the list further:
|
Nevermind, I see now that we're treating the |
Only 18 packages? That's pretty good! We should fix anything from core, contrib, web, and node (ie. |
I'm a little confused by the |
The issue AFAICT is that the presence of a single bad license flags the package as excluded due to a bad license. So in the case of |
This is a case that we could fix with rewrite rules, but we'd have to rewrite how we're doing license detection to either:
|
I merged your changes and published parsing-dataview v2.1.0, thank you. |
@thomashoneyman are those license splits still useful in light of purescript/registry#251 (comment)? |
I think the license splits should no longer disallow a package (we did a "best effort" to scan your repo, and if we missed a license because you had it in a technically-not-valid combined LICENSE file, then we can pull your repo out of the registry if you want). We should update our license parsing code to be more lenient in these cases, too, as I think it will reject packages that come up with a NOASSERTION for the LICENSE file. |
I have closed this because it was meant to help us prioritize packages from the package set to manually fix so that they can stay in the registry, but we've found only |
The current package set contains packages that will not be included in the new registry, and therefore won't be included in the package sets produced by the registry (since the package sets only include packages from the registry).
An example:
purescript-parsing
will be dropped because of #249, unless its LICENSE file gets fixed. It would be good to understand what other packages will be dropped from the package sets unless we fix something about them -- especially packages within the core, contrib, web, and node organizations (likepurescript-parsing
).To handle this, we would need to:
bower-exclusions.json
filebower-exclusions
against the package set to find package versions found in both placesThe list of package versions that exist in both the package set and the bower exclusions represents packages currently provided by the set but which will no longer be provided going forward. This is also the list of packages that we really ought to fix, if we're going to manually fix any packages, to provide a smooth upgrade experience for users.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: