The SDK packages published from this repo include a LICENSE.txt file, which contains the text of the MIT license:
|
<PackageLicenseFile>LICENSE.txt</PackageLicenseFile> |
|
<PackageLicensePath>$(MSBuildThisFileDirectory)$(PackageLicenseFile)</PackageLicensePath> |
However, https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/reference/nuspec#license recommends that MIT-licensed packages should have <license type="expression">MIT</license> instead of referring to a file. In Directory.Build.targets, that would be <PackageLicenseExpression>MIT</PackageLicenseExpression>. I believe that would let the NuGet Gallery pages for Microsoft.Build.NoTargets and other packages display the text "MIT license", like the page for Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions already does.
LICENSE.txt does contain a copyright notice that would not be covered by <license type="expression">MIT</license>:
|
Copyright (c) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. |
However, almost the same copyright notice is already in the copyright element of the generated nuspec, so omitting the copyright notice from the license element seems OK. I believe it comes from the Copyright property that Directory.Build.targets sets:
|
<Copyright>© Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.</Copyright> |
The SDK packages published from this repo include a LICENSE.txt file, which contains the text of the MIT license:
MSBuildSdks/Directory.Build.targets
Lines 27 to 28 in 5029011
However, https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/reference/nuspec#license recommends that MIT-licensed packages should have
<license type="expression">MIT</license>instead of referring to a file. In Directory.Build.targets, that would be<PackageLicenseExpression>MIT</PackageLicenseExpression>. I believe that would let the NuGet Gallery pages for Microsoft.Build.NoTargets and other packages display the text "MIT license", like the page for Microsoft.Extensions.Logging.Abstractions already does.LICENSE.txt does contain a copyright notice that would not be covered by
<license type="expression">MIT</license>:MSBuildSdks/LICENSE.txt
Line 3 in 5029011
However, almost the same copyright notice is already in the
copyrightelement of the generated nuspec, so omitting the copyright notice from thelicenseelement seems OK. I believe it comes from the Copyright property that Directory.Build.targets sets:MSBuildSdks/Directory.Build.targets
Line 26 in 5029011