This repository was archived by the owner on May 27, 2024. It is now read-only.
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 20
Redefining the three steps #20
Comments
Ad 1., perhaps:
Ad 2., perhaps:
Ad 3.:
Of course, these are not as nice and short as your initial suggestions. |
Since we speak about the headlines, I wouldn't want to go too much into detail, but keep it short and simple. What about:
|
I really like the suggestions by @mxmehl, verbatim. |
LGTM +1 Good job |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Max and I are working on redefining the three REUSE steps.
The current steps are:
During our sprint, we produced this:
I am not entirely happy with the exact wording, but I like the gist of it.
"Choose and provide a license" is more succinct than the first iteration, and puts emphasis on actually choosing a license. But it does not emphasise the fact that you are very likely to have multiple licenses, at all. Is this an okay trade-off?
"Add a license header to each file". This is good, but I'm not sure if "license header" necessarily includes copyright tags. Is there a short synonym we can use instead? "Add a copyright and license tag to the header of each file"?
"Confirm compliance with the linter". This is good, but I feel that the wording is wrong. "linter" should probably be replaced by "REUSE tool". And I am not really sure on the word "compliance". Compliance is one step removed from what the developer really wants: Every file having clear copyright and licensing information.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: