Initial commit

1 files changed, 113 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/desktop/node_modules/validate-npm-package-license/README.md b/desktop/node_modules/validate-npm-package-license/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..702bc7b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/desktop/node_modules/validate-npm-package-license/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,113 @@
+validate-npm-package-license
+============================
+
+Give me a string and I'll tell you if it's a valid npm package license string.
+
+```javascript
+var valid = require('validate-npm-package-license');
+```
+
+SPDX license identifiers are valid license strings:
+
+```javascript
+
+var assert = require('assert');
+var validSPDXExpression = {
+  validForNewPackages: true,
+  validForOldPackages: true,
+  spdx: true
+};
+
+assert.deepEqual(valid('MIT'), validSPDXExpression);
+assert.deepEqual(valid('BSD-2-Clause'), validSPDXExpression);
+assert.deepEqual(valid('Apache-2.0'), validSPDXExpression);
+assert.deepEqual(valid('ISC'), validSPDXExpression);
+```
+The function will return a warning and suggestion for nearly-correct license identifiers:
+
+```javascript
+assert.deepEqual(
+  valid('Apache 2.0'),
+  {
+    validForOldPackages: false,
+    validForNewPackages: false,
+    warnings: [
+      'license should be ' +
+      'a valid SPDX license expression (without "LicenseRef"), ' +
+      '"UNLICENSED", or ' +
+      '"SEE LICENSE IN <filename>"',
+      'license is similar to the valid expression "Apache-2.0"'
+    ]
+  }
+);
+```
+
+SPDX expressions are valid, too ...
+
+```javascript
+// Simple SPDX license expression for dual licensing
+assert.deepEqual(
+  valid('(GPL-3.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause)'),
+  validSPDXExpression
+);
+```
+
+... except if they contain `LicenseRef`:
+
+```javascript
+var warningAboutLicenseRef = {
+  validForOldPackages: false,
+  validForNewPackages: false,
+  spdx: true,
+  warnings: [
+    'license should be ' +
+    'a valid SPDX license expression (without "LicenseRef"), ' +
+    '"UNLICENSED", or ' +
+    '"SEE LICENSE IN <filename>"',
+  ]
+};
+
+assert.deepEqual(
+  valid('LicenseRef-Made-Up'),
+  warningAboutLicenseRef
+);
+
+assert.deepEqual(
+  valid('(MIT OR LicenseRef-Made-Up)'),
+  warningAboutLicenseRef
+);
+```
+
+If you can't describe your licensing terms with standardized SPDX identifiers, put the terms in a file in the package and point users there:
+
+```javascript
+assert.deepEqual(
+  valid('SEE LICENSE IN LICENSE.txt'),
+  {
+    validForNewPackages: true,
+    validForOldPackages: true,
+    inFile: 'LICENSE.txt'
+  }
+);
+
+assert.deepEqual(
+  valid('SEE LICENSE IN license.md'),
+  {
+    validForNewPackages: true,
+    validForOldPackages: true,
+    inFile: 'license.md'
+  }
+);
+```
+
+If there aren't any licensing terms, use `UNLICENSED`:
+
+```javascript
+var unlicensed = {
+  validForNewPackages: true,
+  validForOldPackages: true,
+  unlicensed: true
+};
+assert.deepEqual(valid('UNLICENSED'), unlicensed);
+assert.deepEqual(valid('UNLICENCED'), unlicensed);
+```