Nemo157

The main case I'm thinking about is "I want to license my code under LGPL-2.1-only" and "I want to (use a library/copy code) under LGPL-3.0-{only,or-later}". As a non-copyleft application using...

I'm not sure whether I want a comparison against cargo-license, but definitely should enhance the readme, lots of new features to highlight.

@arve0 that's correct currently, but I think it makes sense to print something saying it was fine, opened #53 for it.

:+1: seems useful, doesn't appear to be _exactly_ the intended usecase, but I think it still makes sense to apply.

There's also been discussion of having an API for a proc-macro to ask `rustc` to expand inner macros. I can't think of a way to work around this in general...

Good question, I used these in an internal project before adding in the `EmbrioNrf51` abstraction. So you can use them something like ```rust let timer = Timer::timer0(peripherals.TIMER0); timer.timeout(time).await?; ``` but...

IANAL and just based the compatibility matrix on https://www.dwheeler.com/essays/floss-license-slide.html What I believe this is saying, is that by claiming that `cargo` is licensed under the `MIT` license, but including the...

generic names does include other extensions: https://github.com/Nemo157/cargo-lichking/blob/0d29ba65e5ee58bf166febfd04bff4e4c28e9c11/src/discovery.rs#L101-L104 but the license specific ones don't

After some investigation it looks like `license-exprs` doesn't actually support parsing licenses, just validating that they are correctly formed. It looks like it would be relatively simple to add, but...

Makes a lot of sense. It looks like the text at least is available under `share/doc/rust` in the toolchain. Although, that doesn’t appear to have any mention of `hashbrown` and...