is the license.txt in the source folder supposed to be the license of the app we're doing or the license of PortableApps.com?
New: Kanri (Oct 9, '24), Platform 29.5.3 (Jun 27, '24)
1,100+ portable packages, 1.1 billion downloads
No Ads November!, Please donate today
Visit the Community page
Join our forums
Subscribe to our email newsletter
Subscribe with RSS
Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on LinkedIn
Follow us on Twitter
Follow us on Mastodon
Follow us on BlueSky
It's the license for the launcher. The license for the app is with the app binaries, for example: 7-ZipPortable\App\7-Zip\copying.txt
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
does the main app folder need to have the app's license?
Each app places a license where they deem appropriate. Some are within a copying.txt file. Some are in help. So it varies. It doesn't have to be anywhere specific.
Sometimes, the impossible can become possible, if you're awesome!
When the PAF installer shows a license agreement and requires acceptance before installing the app, is it drawing from the app directory, that is, it's showing the app license and not the PortableApps license?
How do we know whether an app requires that page of the installer? Many of the installers have the eula value commented out.
MC
the installer only has that possibility because some commercial Apps and Mozilla?s Apps need it. Most Open Source Apps dont need it. And you can specify where it gets the license from.
"What about Love?" - "Overrated. Biochemically no different than eating large quantities of chocolate." - Al Pacino in The Devils Advocate
John says that the license for the app should be in app\Firefox (for example), but the PortableApps.comInstaller.nsi seems to be pulling EULA.rtf from Other\Source. That may be because the LICENSE file in app\Firefox is poorly formatted for inclusion in the installer, but I thought I'd check to see if there was something else developers need to know as they put together a package. (In other words, as we put together a PAF package that needs the EULA accepted, should we put a copy of the EULA in Other\Source, because that's where FFP does, or only do that if the copy in app\[appname] is not usable by the installer, or ignore FFP because it is not a good example?)
I'd still like to know if there is a way to determine whether the installer needs to include the "accept Eula" page or not. For example, is it the case that MPL apps need it but GPL apps don't? I have only seen John use that page in FFP and TBP, and the line seems to be commented out on the other apps, but I've not looked exhaustively.
MC
afaik till now only Mozilla's Apps have Eulas as that's part of Johns deal.
"What about Love?" - "Overrated. Biochemically no different than eating large quantities of chocolate." - Al Pacino in The Devils Advocate
You are right. That's why John said to use the KompoZer installer.