Revert "Declare license file in packaging tutorial"

[bhrutledge]

Reverts #1098

While investigating pypa/twine#926, I discovered that using license = { file="LICENSE" } will result in the contents of LICENSE being displayed on PyPI in the "Meta" sidebar section. For example, see:

https://test.pypi.org/project/example-package-bhrutledge/0.0.1/

When I remove that line, I get what I think is the desired behavior, which is the name of the license:

https://test.pypi.org/project/example-package-bhrutledge/0.0.2rc1/

FYI @EpicWink

[EpicWink]

Ah, that seems to be an oversight on the distribution end of Python packaging. Maybe it's worth starting a discussion in Discourse?

If a license file is in the repo, how does the backend know to include it in the package? The Manifest.in tutorial suggests it should be in license_files.

[ofek]

After PEP 639 it'll be under licenses/

[bhrutledge]

Ah, that seems to be an oversight on the distribution end of Python packaging. Maybe it's worth starting a discussion in Discourse?

I think that's already underway, in the form of PEP 639.

If a license file is in the repo, how does the backend know to include it in the package? The Manifest.in tutorial suggests it should be in license_files.

I think this depends on the backend. As noted in #1098 (comment), all backends except Flit include LICENSE in the sdist and wheel , even when license.file is absent. Also, I'm think MANIFEST.in is only relevant for setuptools.

[EpicWink]

As noted in #1098 (comment), all backends except Flit include LICENSE in the sdist and wheel , even when license.file is absent.

If that's the case, perhaps that could be mentioned in place of including license.file