peculiarventures/bytestream.js

ByteStream.js is a set of classes manipulating bytes and bits with optimized for speed perfomance

bytestream.js's Issues

Conflicting license information?

I am currently working on packaging an app depending on PKIjs (and thus ByteStream.js) for distribution. As this would happen in minified form, I want to ensure all licensing and usage requirements are fulfilled.

While looking through all of PKIjs dependencies, I noted that the licensing of ByteStream.js appears to be a bit unclear: While the LICENSE file clearly states the source code can be freely redistributed as long as the license and disclaimer are preserved, this comment seemingly makes it impossible to distribute ByteStream.js (or even to clone the repo, if taken literally).

I would be very glad if you could clarify the situation or even go as far as stating your favourite way of distributing minifed versions of PKIjs in a legally sound manner.

1.0.28 has a dependency on "publish" package

this change isn't in git. was it an accidental local modification ? there's no need for this dep that i can see, and it's causing a lot more unnecessary stuff from getting pulled in (e.g. the npm package).

   "jsnext:main": "./src/bytestream.js",
   "module": "./src/bytestream.js",
   "main": "./build/bytestream.js",
-  "license": "BSD-3-Clause"
+  "license": "BSD-3-Clause",
+  "dependencies": {
+    "publish": "^0.6.0"
+  }
 }

1.0.28 npm package includes .git/ subdir

npm doesn't like it when packages include .git/ in their top level. looks like this was an accident though:

$ wget -nv https://registry.npmjs.org/bytestreamjs/-/bytestreamjs-1.0.28.tgz
2019-07-22 09:52:55 URL:https://registry.npmjs.org/bytestreamjs/-/bytestreamjs-1.0.28.tgz [66938/66938] -> "bytestreamjs-1.0.28.tgz" [1]

$ tar tf bytestreamjs-1.0.28.tgz 
package/package.json
package/LICENSE
package/README.MD
package/.git/hooks/README.sample
package/build/bytestream.js
package/build/bytestream.js.map
package/src/bytestream.js