Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on May 27, 2024. It is now read-only.

Create a new REUSE Specification #23

Merged
merged 42 commits into from
Jul 5, 2019
Merged

Create a new REUSE Specification #23

merged 42 commits into from
Jul 5, 2019

Conversation

carmenbianca
Copy link
Member

@carmenbianca carmenbianca commented Apr 29, 2019

I've started work on writing a new spec. It's a heavy WIP that will need a lot of tailoring.

Fixes #7

@carmenbianca
Copy link
Member Author

I have finished most of the spec! That was surprisingly easy. I half-suspect that I am missing something glaringly obvious.

There are still some things that need to be improved, as can be seen in the FIXME and TODO tags. I am leaving those things until I get some feedback.

I tried to use must/should/may consistently. It is a little difficult in some spots, so I'll need to do a pass-over of those words when finalising.

@silverhook
Copy link
Collaborator

I’ll look into it in the coming days. I kept some notes from the last time. Sorry for joining the partly late, busy times.

@carmenbianca
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks a lot @silverhook !

Copy link
Collaborator

@silverhook silverhook left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Here are a few comments and suggestions from my side.

It took me longer than anticipated, but I hope it’s useful. Happy to provide pull requests, if needed 😃

I’ll tackle the tutorial early next week.

@carmenbianca
Copy link
Member Author

Thank you @silverhook so much for your review.

Co-Authored-By: Matija Šuklje <[email protected]>
Copy link

@goneall goneall left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just a few comments related to the SPDX spec.

Reported-by: Matija Šuklje <[email protected]>
Copy link
Collaborator

@silverhook silverhook left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Before we were running into a “MUST vs SHALL” problem on the same piece of info. I think my suggestion makes it less ambiguous, but I’m very open to better and nicer wording.

@carmenbianca
Copy link
Member Author

I have spoken briefly with @silverhook off-list. We are both struggling with the dimensions of this PR. Almost 150 comments spread over dozens of disparate conversations/threads.

I am going to open separate issues for all identifiable threads I can find (some threads will be combined into the same issue). I am then going to close all conversations in this thread, and move them to the separate issues. I will (if it's not too tedious) copy comments over to the new issues so that the issues are not without context.

When I've done that, I will post a new comment here with links to all newly opened issues. I will @ people involved in the threads.

This will hopefully make it easier to tackle this PR, because GitHub's interface is currently more harmful than it is helpful.

I will begin doing that tomorrow, but I'm writing this now mostly as a to-do list for myself. Figured I might as well publicly share the to-do list so that everyone is up-to-date.

@carmenbianca
Copy link
Member Author

I have closed all conversations that I could find. I have opened the following issues for them:

#24
#25
#26
#27
#28
#29
#30
#31
#32
#33

Two extra examples have also been added
carmenbianca and others added 3 commits June 11, 2019 12:17
Suggested-by: Matija Šuklje <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Max Mehl <[email protected]>
Suggested-by: Matija Šuklje <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Max Mehl <[email protected]>
The statement makes it clear that each and every file should have a
comment header that contains copyright and licensing information.

Suggested-by: Matija Šuklje <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Matija Šuklje <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Max Mehl <[email protected]>
@carmenbianca carmenbianca merged commit 1704fd5 into master Jul 5, 2019
@mxmehl mxmehl deleted the spec branch March 21, 2021 12:15
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Better clarify the three options of how to store a license text
4 participants