electron-builder icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
electron-builder copied to clipboard
verified publisher icon electron-userland

builded .deb shows wrong license informations

Open yafp opened this issue 6 years ago • 37 comments

  • Version: 21.2.0

none

  • Target: Linux (.deb)

If i double click the .deb on ubuntu the application software opens up and shows informations about this particular .deb file. Under license it shows "proprietary" while my package.json has the following configured:

...
"license": "GPL-3.0",
    "build": {
  ...

Question:

Is that an error in

  • my package.json file,
  • the Ubuntu Software Center ui or
  • really from electron-builder?

ubuntu_software_license_of_deb

yafp avatar Sep 26 '19 11:09 yafp

https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-desktop also has this issue and has been unable to find a solution

kauffj avatar Oct 13 '19 15:10 kauffj

https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-desktop also has this issue and has been unable to find a solution

thanks for the info. Let's hope there is a fix.

yafp avatar Oct 14 '19 05:10 yafp

The license makes it into the metadata. The issue is that the license value is still showing as proprietary.

kauffj@kauffj-t480:~$ dpkg-deb --info /home/kauffj/Downloads/LBRY_0.36.1.deb 
 ...
 Package: lbry
 Version: 0.36.1-7689
 License: MIT
 Vendor: LBRY Inc. <[email protected]>
 ...

I suspect additional metadata needs to be included (or "MIT" is not an acceptable value), but we haven't been able to determine what it is.

kauffj avatar Oct 14 '19 19:10 kauffj

or "MIT" is not an acceptable value

as i am having issues with GPLv3 - i doubt its MIT related ;)

yafp avatar Oct 14 '19 20:10 yafp

@yafp user @danrobi11 provided some useful info over on the lbry-desktop ticket:

https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-desktop/issues/1376#issuecomment-543833312

kauffj avatar Oct 18 '19 21:10 kauffj

As suggested by wxl at Lubuntu: https://github.com/lbryio/lbry-desktop/issues/1376#issuecomment-544212361 I opened a deb packages License issue at the gnome-software gitlab. Andre Kappler at gitlab needs more information from you guys. Please have a look, thanks: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-software/issues/833#note_628721

danrobi11 avatar Oct 20 '19 10:10 danrobi11

Is this still relevant? If so, what is blocking it? Is there anything you can do to help move it forward?

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.

stale[bot] avatar Dec 19 '19 10:12 stale[bot]

It is still relevant

yafp avatar Dec 19 '19 10:12 yafp

The specific issue is known at this point, which is that electron-builder needs to include this machine-readable copyrights file, or at least spit some sort of warning out that you are expected to package this yourself.

https://www.debian.org/doc/packaging-manuals/copyright-format/1.0/

kauffj avatar Dec 20 '19 22:12 kauffj

New development from the gnome-software regarding this issue. https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-software/issues/875#note_674048

danrobi11 avatar Dec 27 '19 04:12 danrobi11

Thanks @danrobi11 for the hint. Let's hope the electron-builder developers are considering a fix on this side as well

yafp avatar Dec 28 '19 19:12 yafp

Is this still relevant? If so, what is blocking it? Is there anything you can do to help move it forward?

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.

stale[bot] avatar Feb 26 '20 22:02 stale[bot]

This is still relevant. It is workable or close to workable.

See: https://github.com/electron-userland/electron-builder/issues/4270#issuecomment-568115155 https://github.com/electron-userland/electron-builder/issues/4270#issuecomment-569185627

kauffj avatar Feb 26 '20 22:02 kauffj

Is this still relevant? If so, what is blocking it? Is there anything you can do to help move it forward?

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.

stale[bot] avatar Apr 26 '20 22:04 stale[bot]

Yes, this is still relevant.

yafp avatar Apr 27 '20 05:04 yafp

Is this still relevant? If so, what is blocking it? Is there anything you can do to help move it forward?

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.

stale[bot] avatar Jun 26 '20 05:06 stale[bot]

Still relevant.

marado avatar Jun 30 '20 00:06 marado

Is this still relevant? If so, what is blocking it? Is there anything you can do to help move it forward?

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.

stale[bot] avatar Aug 29 '20 04:08 stale[bot]

Still relevant.

marado avatar Aug 29 '20 09:08 marado

@develar even Visual Studio Code, arguably the most popular open source Electron app, builds a .deb that indicates a license of proprietary, when it's actually MIT licensed. As an open source developer yourself I'm sure you can appreciate the desire to have what you have built be labeled properly. Is there any way this issue can get looked at or prioritized?

kauffj avatar Aug 31 '20 16:08 kauffj

Is this still relevant? If so, what is blocking it? Is there anything you can do to help move it forward?

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.

stale[bot] avatar Oct 31 '20 03:10 stale[bot]

Still relevant.

marado avatar Oct 31 '20 17:10 marado

Is this still relevant? If so, what is blocking it? Is there anything you can do to help move it forward?

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.

stale[bot] avatar Dec 31 '20 19:12 stale[bot]

Still relevant.

marado avatar Jan 02 '21 12:01 marado

Is this still relevant? If so, what is blocking it? Is there anything you can do to help move it forward?

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.

stale[bot] avatar Mar 20 '21 00:03 stale[bot]

Still relevant

marado avatar Mar 20 '21 00:03 marado

Is this still relevant? If so, what is blocking it? Is there anything you can do to help move it forward?

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.

stale[bot] avatar Jun 04 '21 15:06 stale[bot]

Still relevant.

marado avatar Jun 04 '21 15:06 marado

Is this still relevant? If so, what is blocking it? Is there anything you can do to help move it forward?

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.

stale[bot] avatar Sep 19 '21 20:09 stale[bot]

Still relevant.

marado avatar Sep 19 '21 20:09 marado