Chaos Toolkit
Replies: 3 comments
-
|
Hi Chris, Thanks for raising the point. My thoughts are:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I think this is a sensible approach. I will raise an issue and submit an MR to default the licence type to Unknown when Do we also want to make a cookie cutter template for the extensions template rather than people having to fork, or clone it then change the origin repo etc? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
We had started with cookiecutter. I'm not sure it's as popular as it used to be so I don't have much perspective on this. Always remember that everything we had is maintainance for later ;) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
There was a recent issue that is caused as a result of the
chaostoolkit-addonspackage not having a licence type. According to thecontributionspages, all projects in the toolkit org should have an APL 2.0 licence. This is raised as a discussion since I am not sure how many projects might not have a licence.It also opens a wider question of do we require extensions to have a licence type? If not then we should default this with something when not found. If it should have one then we need to filter out extensions that don't define one. Lastly if they must have one does it need to be APL 2.0
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions