Skip to content

docs: add LICENSE (MIT)#116

Merged
rubenhensen merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
docs/add-license
Jul 1, 2026
Merged

docs: add LICENSE (MIT)#116
rubenhensen merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
docs/add-license

Conversation

@rubenhensen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Closes #108.

Adds a LICENSE file — the repo had none, so default copyright applied and usage/contribution rights were ambiguous.

Choice

Matches the main encryption4all/postguard repo: MIT, copied verbatim (including the Copyright 2021 Encryption 4 All line) so the two stay consistent. Also sets "license": "MIT" in package.json.

Say the word if you'd rather bump the copyright year or holder text.

@dobby-coder

dobby-coder Bot commented Jul 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

On it, @rubenhensen! I'm reviewing PR #116 now and will check the LICENSE file addition for correctness and rule-compliance before submitting a consolidated review.

@dobby-coder dobby-coder Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM — approving. ✅

What this does: adds a top-level LICENSE (MIT, Copyright 2021 Encryption 4 All) copied verbatim from encryption4all/postguard, and sets "license": "MIT" in package.json. Resolves the ambiguous default-copyright state (closes #108).

Verification:

  • LICENSE is byte-identical to encryption4all/postguard's main LICENSE — confirms the "copied verbatim" claim and keeps the two repos consistent.
  • package.json parses as valid JSON with a MIT license field.
  • All 14 CI checks pass, including the Conventional Commit / pr-title.yml gate — the title docs: add LICENSE (MIT) is valid conventional-commit format.
  • Per-rule compliance sweep across all repo + org rules: no violations. (private: true alongside an MIT license is fine — a license field on a private package is valid.)

Tests were not run separately — this is a doc/metadata-only change with no runtime behavior to exercise.

Non-blocking nit (follow-up, out of scope for this PR): README.md has no ## License section, which the org standardized-README format expects. Now that the repo has a license, a short ## License (MIT) section in the README would be a nice consistency follow-up.

FYI on the copyright line: the 2021 year and Encryption 4 All holder were carried over verbatim from postguard for consistency. If postguard-business post-dates 2021 you may want to bump the year, but matching the parent repo is a reasonable call — no change required.

@dobby-coder

dobby-coder Bot commented Jul 1, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Reviewed and approved! ✅ All 14 CI checks pass, the LICENSE is byte-identical to the main postguard repo, and the conventional commit title looks good. One non-blocking note: it'd be nice to add a section to the README at some point, but that's a follow-up — nothing blocking merge here.

@rubenhensen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Thanks @dobby-coder — added the ## License section to README.md (MIT, linking the new LICENSE file) in the latest commit, matching the org standardized-README format. Left the 2021 / Encryption 4 All copyright line as-is to stay byte-consistent with the parent postguard repo, per your FYI.

@rubenhensen rubenhensen merged commit bf8be23 into main Jul 1, 2026
14 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add a LICENSE file

1 participant