Package both licence files in release archives - #11
Merged
Conversation
The relicense in 4d6a880 replaced LICENSE with LICENSE-MIT and LICENSE-APACHE, but the release workflow still copied a file named LICENSE. `cp` would have failed on a path that no longer exists, and with `shell: bash` that fails the step — so tagging v1.0.0 would have produced no assets at all rather than assets with the wrong licence. Both files now go into dist/ and into each archive, which is what a dual licence requires: the recipient needs both texts to exercise the choice. Also drops the `[ -f README.md ]` guards. They date from when the repo had no README and quietly shipped archives without one; it has had a README since 3e9a802, and a missing one should now fail the build rather than pass silently. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Blocker found while preparing the v1.0.0 tag.
release.ymlstill copied a file namedLICENSE, which4d6a880removed in favour ofLICENSE-MIT+LICENSE-APACHE. Withshell: bash, the failingcpfails the step — so tagging would have produced no release assets at all, on all four platforms.dist/and into every archive. A dual licence needs both present for the recipient to exercise the choice.[ -f README.md ]guards, left over from when the repo had no README and shipped archives without one silently. A missing README should fail the build now, not pass quietly.🤖 Generated with Claude Code