Add "license" and "licenses" to package.json

[garthk]

Specifying your license in package.json makes it a lot easier for your users to find and comply with GNU Affero licenses.

Also giving licenses (an array of objects with type and url keys) helps users whose legal departments request both the license name and the text. See this example from async:

  "licenses": [{
    "type": "MIT",
    "url": "https://github.com/caolan/async/raw/master/LICENSE"
  }]

Though licenses isn't specified in the npm package.json spec, it is supported by the NPM site, as you'll see if you check async's NPM page.

Thanks!

[rlidwka]

makes it a lot easier for your users to find and comply with GNU Affero licenses.

why people using MIT-licensed package need to comply with GNU Affero licenses?

[buschtoens]

As all projects of TJ, this one's MIT as well. Go ahead and do a PR.

However, I don't see a convincing reason for adding the licenses array. A copy of the MIT license is appended to the readme, which is also part of the npm tarball. You will be automatically provided with the license, when you download this module. In addition to that it's really not that difficult to find the MIT license on the net. Apart from that, every serious software company should know the mainstream licenses.

So, I ask you to go forth and submit a PR adding "license": "MIT" to the package.json without the licenses array.

Thank you for your interest and participation!

[garthk]

I was hoping to avoid forking a few dozen repos to make such minor changes, but so be it.

The license text, if present, trumps the title. I'm afraid my legal department insists on checking both. Breaking LICENSE out to its own file and pointing at it with licenses makes that a lot easier.

[buschtoens]

Because I have empathy, too. Haha. :D /re pugjs/pug#1374