Include README and LICENSE in published npm packages - #45
Conversation
npm packages are packed from a staging directory that only received the binaries, so published tarballs had no readme or license file and npmjs.com showed an empty readme. bump to 0.2.2 since 0.2.1 is already published and cannot be replaced.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
馃挕 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 0431c2bc5b
鈩癸笍 About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 馃憤.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
the verifier requires exact tarball file lists and still expected only binaries and package.json, failing the release smoke tests now that packaging includes readme and license files.
|
@codex review |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. More of your lovely PRs please. Reviewed commit: 鈩癸笍 About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 馃憤. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
Published npm tarballs are packed from a staging directory that only received the binaries, so they contained no README or LICENSE and npmjs.com showed "This package does not have a README."
README.mdandLICENSEfrom the repo root into every staged package (root and platform) beforenpm packrunsValidation:
bun run typecheck,bun test(1085 pass),licenses:generate/licenses:check(notices unchanged), and a local root-package build confirming the tarball containsREADME.md,LICENSE,package.json, andbin/spotuify.cjs.