July 04, 2016

On 6/30/2016 4:09 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>
>> On 30 Jun 2016, at 00:15, Walter Bright via dmd-internals <dmd-internals@puremagic.com> wrote:
>>
>> I thought all Boost required was leaving the notice intact.
>
> It requires attribution for distribution source code, but not binary code. But that does not make much sense for a document.

Since a lot of our docs are generated from source code, I think it would be confusing to mix Boost licenses in with CC licenses.
_______________________________________________
dmd-internals mailing list
dmd-internals@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
July 04, 2016
Good. As for transferring ownership, I'd like to leave that to someone who understands github better than myself.

On 7/4/2016 11:47 AM, Михаил Страшун via dmd-internals wrote:
> Oops, I have sent this e-mail from wrong address first and only now
> noticed it didn't get to the mail list. Repeating again:
>
> I think we are in pretty good shape to move forward with it now.
>
> Changes since last week:
>
> - Exported most of already implemented DIPs as a separate "archive"
> directory (https://github.com/Dicebot/DIPs/tree/master/DIPs/archive).
> Some of very old DIPs don't represent actual implementation despite
> being marked as approved and I skipped them to prevent spreading confusion.
> - Added explicit mention that DIPs authored by Andrei/Walter are handled
> differently despite beeing part of queue (they don't need own approval,
> instead it becomes community feedback aggregation)
> - Switch to Creative Commons Zero 1.0 license instead of legally vague
> "public domain"
> - Few wording tweaks here and there
>
> I also wanted to initiate transfer of ownership to "dlang" github
> organization but it only allows to do so if you are admin of both repos
> - any suggestions how to handle it?
>
> Unless there are any objections on proposed process, I'd like to proceed
> with community announcement and call to start submitting proposals
> (including exported drafts from wiki) as soon as repo is transferred to
> dlang organization.
_______________________________________________
dmd-internals mailing list
dmd-internals@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
July 05, 2016
On 07/04/2016 11:01 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> 
>> On 04 Jul 2016, at 20:47, Михаил Страшун via dmd-internals <dmd-internals@puremagic.com> wrote:
>>
>> - Exported most of already implemented DIPs as a separate "archive" directory (https://github.com/Dicebot/DIPs/tree/master/DIPs/archive).
> 
> DIP 43, Objective-C integration, is partially implemented. Should that be resubmitted or added to the archive or … ?
> 
> > /Jacob Carlborg

It only checked DIPs marked as `Implemented` in wiki. If DIP43 was implemented and merged it definitely should get into archive, I will check it.



July 05, 2016
On 07/05/2016 03:08 AM, Walter Bright via dmd-internals wrote:
> 
> 
> On 6/30/2016 4:09 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>>
>>> On 30 Jun 2016, at 00:15, Walter Bright via dmd-internals <dmd-internals@puremagic.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I thought all Boost required was leaving the notice intact.
>>
>> It requires attribution for distribution source code, but not binary code. But that does not make much sense for a document.
> 
> Since a lot of our docs are generated from source code, I think it would be confusing to mix Boost licenses in with CC licenses.

There is nothing confusing. CC0 is a special license crafted to emulate public domain concept as close as possible in jurisdictions that don't have the notion of public domain. It can be considered a functional equivalent of public domain and as such is even more permissive than Boost.

I decided to not use Boost to avoid shady questions regarding mandatory attribution when i.e. quoting the DIP text / code snippet in newsgroup post.



July 05, 2016

On 7/5/2016 6:33 AM, Михаил Страшун via dmd-internals wrote:
> There is nothing confusing. CC0 is a special license crafted to emulate
> public domain concept as close as possible in jurisdictions that don't
> have the notion of public domain. It can be considered a functional
> equivalent of public domain and as such is even more permissive than Boost.
>
> I decided to not use Boost to avoid shady questions regarding mandatory
> attribution when i.e. quoting the DIP text / code snippet in newsgroup post.

Good.
_______________________________________________
dmd-internals mailing list
dmd-internals@puremagic.com
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
1 2 3
Next ›   Last »