Bug 1920206

Summary:	Bundler script should handle license objects
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Ben Beasley <code>
Component:	nodejs-packaging	Assignee:	NodeJS Packaging SIG <nodejs-sig>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	unspecified	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	34	CC:	code, mrunge, nodejs-sig, sgallagh, tchollingsworth, thrcka, zsvetlik
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	nodejs-packaging-2021.06-1.fc34 nodejs-packaging-2021.06-1.fc33	Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2021-06-11 01:13:53 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Ben Beasley 2021-01-25 19:06:39 UTC

Description of problem:

While it is deprecated, some NPM packages have an object in the license field in package.json, especially when older versions are required. The script nodejs-packaging-bundler should handle this. Documentation and an example are at https://docs.npmjs.com/cli/v6/configuring-npm/package-json#license.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

2021.01-2.fc34

How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1. nodejs-packaging-bundler gtop 1.1.0

Actual results:

gtop-1.1.0-bundled-licenses.txt looks like:

{
}
"BSD-2-Clause"
"ISC"
"MIT"
"(MIT OR CC0-1.0)"
"MIT/X11"
  "type": "MIT",
  "url": "https://github.com/isaacs/nopt/raw/master/LICENSE"


Expected results:

gtop-1.1.0-bundled-licenses.txt looks like:

"BSD-2-Clause"
"ISC"
"MIT"
"(MIT OR CC0-1.0)"
"MIT/X11"

Comment 1 Ben Cotton 2021-02-09 15:42:57 UTC

This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 34 development cycle.
Changing version to 34.

Comment 2 Stephen Gallagher 2021-03-04 19:55:29 UTC

Finally had a chance to look at this today. PR submitted: https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/nodejs-packaging/pull-request/5

Comment 3 Fedora Update System 2021-06-02 18:45:26 UTC

FEDORA-2021-0bc5704285 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 34. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-0bc5704285

Comment 4 Fedora Update System 2021-06-02 18:45:27 UTC

FEDORA-2021-69c55ffcd7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 33. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-69c55ffcd7

Comment 5 Fedora Update System 2021-06-03 01:30:55 UTC

FEDORA-2021-69c55ffcd7 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-69c55ffcd7`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-69c55ffcd7

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 6 Fedora Update System 2021-06-03 19:04:56 UTC

FEDORA-2021-0bc5704285 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --advisory=FEDORA-2021-0bc5704285`
You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2021-0bc5704285

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.

Comment 7 Fedora Update System 2021-06-11 01:13:53 UTC

FEDORA-2021-0bc5704285 has been pushed to the Fedora 34 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.

Comment 8 Fedora Update System 2021-06-11 01:19:42 UTC

FEDORA-2021-69c55ffcd7 has been pushed to the Fedora 33 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.