Skip to content

[Docs] PyPI Meta tags no longer include license #4956

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
1 task done
WilliamRoyNelson opened this issue Apr 21, 2025 · 5 comments · May be fixed by #4957
Open
1 task done

[Docs] PyPI Meta tags no longer include license #4956

WilliamRoyNelson opened this issue Apr 21, 2025 · 5 comments · May be fixed by #4957
Labels
documentation Needs Triage Issues that need to be evaluated for severity and status.

Comments

@WilliamRoyNelson
Copy link

Summary

PyPI normally shows a package's license in the Meta tags. This is important for automated tools used in enterprise environments that ensure that only licensed packages are used, and for users to be able to easily determine if a package has a open-source license. The current PyPI page has no indication that setuptools has an open source license.

Before change to license classifiers:
Image
Now it doesn't:
Image

OS / Environment

No response

Additional Information

78.1.0 shows license: https://pypi.org/project/setuptools/78.1.0/
78.1.1 does not: https://pypi.org/project/setuptools/78.1.1/

Code of Conduct

  • I agree to follow the PSF Code of Conduct
@WilliamRoyNelson WilliamRoyNelson added documentation Needs Triage Issues that need to be evaluated for severity and status. labels Apr 21, 2025
@WilliamRoyNelson WilliamRoyNelson changed the title [Docs] PyPI Meta tags no longe rinclude license [Docs] PyPI Meta tags no longer include license Apr 21, 2025
@nykh
Copy link

nykh commented Apr 22, 2025

Can confirm, liccheck reads it as

setuptools (79.0.0): UNKNOWN

@WilliamRoyNelson
Copy link
Author

It looks like it's related to this:
jaraco/skeleton#170

But it seems like the change occurred with this commit:
4e1e893

There was a PR to fully review this: #4901
But I don't think the correct SPDX license expression was figured out before it got merged.

Maybe this should be reverted until the license gets figured out?
#4901 (comment)

@WilliamRoyNelson WilliamRoyNelson linked a pull request Apr 22, 2025 that will close this issue
2 tasks
@WilliamRoyNelson
Copy link
Author

I created a PR to temporarily resolve this problem until a perfect PEP 639 license declaration can be formulated.
#4957

@wagenrace
Copy link

This seems related to license_scanner issues 26
I looked into the Metadata of the setup package there is only License-File: LICENSE but no License-Expression, License, or Classifier: License :: to be found

I think @WilliamRoyNelson PR will fix it

@WilliamRoyNelson
Copy link
Author

This issue is present in the latest release 79.0.1

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Needs Triage Issues that need to be evaluated for severity and status.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants