You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Currently we set licenses to ISC by default
Describe the solution you'd like
We should not select a default license on behalf of our users. Instead we should default to omitting the license field entirely in non-interactive mode, and in interactive mode require that the user either provides a value or confirms that they do not want to select a license at all. As a bonus it would be nice if we had a site to link to that helps our users select a license that fits their needs.
> npm init
license: <enter>
leaving this field blank means your package is unlicensed. if you're sure, press enter again to continue
license: <enter>
Describe alternatives you've considered
The license default could change, but a new default means that we are once again providing a default that may not align with users needs. It feels best to not provide a license by default at all.
Is there any update on this? Having ISC as the default license in 2024 seems unusual and might hinder the convenience of using npm, especially if users have to manually change the license every time they initialize a new package.
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Currently we set licenses to
ISC
by defaultDescribe the solution you'd like
We should not select a default license on behalf of our users. Instead we should default to omitting the license field entirely in non-interactive mode, and in interactive mode require that the user either provides a value or confirms that they do not want to select a license at all. As a bonus it would be nice if we had a site to link to that helps our users select a license that fits their needs.
Describe alternatives you've considered
The license default could change, but a new default means that we are once again providing a default that may not align with users needs. It feels best to not provide a license by default at all.
Additional context
npm/rfcs#597
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: