July 04, 2016 Re: [dmd-internals] New DIP handling process | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Jacob Carlborg | 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 Re: [dmd-internals] New DIP handling process | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Михаил Страшун | 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 Re: [dmd-internals] New DIP handling process | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Jacob Carlborg Attachments:
| 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 Re: [dmd-internals] New DIP handling process | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Walter Bright Attachments:
| 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 Re: [dmd-internals] New DIP handling process | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Михаил Страшун | 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 |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation