@lilydesignsystem/react-headless 0.1.0

package/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
+# Changelog — @lilydesignsystem/react-headless
+
+The format is loosely based on [Keep a Changelog](https://keepachangelog.com/)
+and the package follows [Semantic Versioning](https://semver.org/).
+
+## 0.1.0 — 2026-09-16
+
+**Package renamed: `lily-design-system-react-headless` → `@lilydesignsystem/react-headless`.** npm scoped packages
+are registry-distinct from their unscoped counterparts, so this is a
+new package with no publish history of its own — version reset to
+`0.1.0` per this project's established rename precedent (the July
+2026 `*-select` → `*-picker` rename). No code or behaviour change
+relative to `lily-design-system-react-headless`'s last published version (`0.1.0`);
+its full changelog continues below, now read as history prior to the
+rescope. The old unscoped name is deprecated on the registry (never
+unpublished), pointing consumers here.
+
+---
+
+## 0.3.1 — 2026-08-26
+
+Metadata-only patch; no code change. Ships the corrected package
+metadata to the registry:
+
+- `license` is the project SPDX menu (`MIT OR Apache-2.0 OR
+  GPL-2.0-only OR GPL-3.0-only OR BSD-3-Clause`), replacing the
+  single-license field that contradicted the repository's LICENSE.md.
+- `repository`, `homepage`, and `bugs` point at the LilyDesignSystem
+  organisation and the documentation site.
+  The previous URLs pointed at `github.com/lily/…`, an unrelated
+  account — the repository link on the npm page led to a stranger's 404.
+- `description` says "Targets WCAG 2.2 AAA." — the previous
+  "WCAG 2.2 AAA compliant" claimed a conformance no audit supports.
+- `author` names the maintainer rather than a bare email address.
+
+Also as of this release, 0.2.0 is marked deprecated on npm (it
+declared a `main` that was never built; see 0.3.0's notes).
+
+## 0.3.0 — 2026-08-23
+
+### Fixed
+
+- **The package had no entry point.** `package.json` declared
+  `"main": "index.js"` and no such file was ever built or shipped, so
+  every `import … from "@lilydesignsystem/react-headless"` failed at
+  resolution. 0.2.0 is broken on npm for this reason. The package now
+  builds a real `dist/` with tsup and points `main`/`types`/
+  `exports` at it.
+
+### Added
+
+- A generated barrel (`index.ts`, written by `build.mjs`) exporting all
+  491 components in the catalog. It is generated rather than
+  hand-maintained because the catalog grows, and a hand-written list
+  silently omits new components.
+- `build.mjs` — generates the barrel, builds `dist/`, and fails loudly if
+  the bundle comes out empty.
+- A `files` allowlist.
+
+### Changed
+
+- **Tarball contents.** Previously the package shipped its entire working
+  tree — sources, tests, Storybook stories, docs and config. It now ships
+  only `dist/` plus the docs.
+- `peerDependencies` now declares the framework it needs.
+- The description said "236 components"; the catalog has 491.
+
+### Also fixed (surfaced by building declarations for the first time)
+
+Nine type errors that no build had ever exercised:
+
+- Eight components destructured `children` and/or `label` without
+  declaring either on their props interface, so both resolved through the
+  `[key: string]: unknown` index signature: `ContentsList`, `ContentsNav`,
+  `EmojiCharacterPicker`, `Figure`, `FileManager`, `QrCodeImage`,
+  `Sonner`, `Sparkline`. The runtime behaviour was already correct — the
+  types simply did not describe it, and `aria-label={label}` typed as
+  `unknown` blocked declaration emit.
+- `TreeList` held its root ref as `useRef<HTMLElement>` while attaching it
+  to an `<ol>`, which wants `Ref<HTMLOListElement>`.
+
+All 2665 tests pass.

package/LICENSE.md

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+<!-- Synced from the canonical repository by bin/sync-special-files.
+     Do not edit here; edit the root copy and re-run the script.
+     Canonical: https://github.com/LilyDesignSystem/lily-design-system/blob/main/LICENSE.md -->
+
+# License
+
+Lily Design System™ is free open source software.
+
+License is any of these, at your option, or contact us for custom license options.
+
+* [MIT](https://opensource.org/license/mit) ([SPDX: MIT](https://spdx.org/licenses/MIT.html))
+
+* [Apache License 2.0](https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0) ([SPDX: Apache-2.0](https://spdx.org/licenses/Apache-2.0.html))
+
+* [GNU General Public License v2.0](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-standalone.html) ([SPDX: GPL-2.0-only](https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-2.0-only.html))
+
+* [GNU General Public License v3.0](https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0-standalone.html) ([SPDX: GPL-3.0-only](https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-3.0-only.html))
+
+* [BSD 3-Clause License](https://opensource.org/license/bsd-3-clause) ([SPDX: BSD-3-Clause](https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause.html))
+
+## SPDX
+
+The machine-readable expression for the choice above is:
+
+```
+SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT OR Apache-2.0 OR GPL-2.0-only OR GPL-3.0-only OR BSD-3-Clause
+```
+
+Every package manifest in this repository should carry that expression, or a
+single identifier from the list where the packaging format does not accept a
+disjunction. You do not need permission to pick one: choose whichever member of
+the list suits your project and comply with that one.
+
+This applies to the whole repository — the component catalog, the seven headless
+libraries, the seven example applications, the seven helper catalogs, the
+`themes/` stylesheets, the `bin/` tooling, and the documentation.
+
+## Scope note
+
+This file supersedes an earlier `CC BY-NC-SA` notice. That notice was a content
+license with a non-commercial clause, it was not an open-source license, and it
+contradicted both the specification and the published packages. It should not be
+relied on. If you obtained Lily under it and that raises a question for you,
+contact <joel@joelparkerhenderson.com>.
+
+## Trademarks
+
+Lily™ and Lily Design System™ are trademarks. The trademarks are distinct from
+the software license: a trademark claim (™) asserts use of the marks and is
+independent of the licenses above. A license to the software is not a license to
+the marks.
+
+You may say your project uses Lily, is built with Lily, or is compatible with
+Lily. Please do not use the marks as the name of your fork or product, or in a
+way that suggests affiliation or endorsement. For any use beyond that, contact
+<joel@joelparkerhenderson.com>.
+
+## Third-party references
+
+Lily's example applications and `themes/` stylesheets take visual reference from
+public-sector design systems including NHS UK, GOV.UK, and USWDS. Lily is not
+affiliated with, endorsed by, or connected to any of those organisations. Their
+names and marks belong to them, and this license grants nothing in respect of
+them.