README.md and RST Doc Refactoring / LICENSE.md Inclusion / File-Level Doc-Blocks

[robfrawley]

• Updated README.md (see https://github.com/robfrawley/LiipImagineBundle/blob/feature-license/README.md to reference how the changes are rendered).
• Refactored RST docs (see https://src.run/docs/symfony-build/liipimaginebundle/index.html to reference how the changes are rendered).
• Added LICENSE.md
• Added file-level doc-blocks

[lsmith77]

don't have time today to review in detail but looks like a good idea in general.

however I would not add .editorconfig.

[robfrawley]

Just wondering why the dislike of an .editorconfig file? No worries, though: I'll remove that shortly. I have another large pull request waiting in-the-wings for after this one is approved that raises test coverage to 78% and refactors some tests/code: https://github.com/liip/LiipImagineBundle/compare/master...robfrawley:feature-refactor-tests?expand=1

[robfrawley]

Rebased on top of latest master, fixes merge conflict caused by pull request #779. Removed .editorconfig. Refactored RST docs.

[robfrawley]

See the updated RST output at https://src.run/docs/symfony-build/liipimaginebundle/index.html

(Built using https://github.com/fabpot/sphinx-php and https://github.com/symfony/symfony-docs/tree/master/_build)

[alexwilson]

Actually I'm wrong - But the CHANGELOG.md file reads that we have distributed the CCv3 by-nc-sa! https://github.com/liip/LiipImagineBundle/pull/781/files#diff-4ac32a78649ca5bdd8e0ba38b7006a1eR4

[alexwilson]

LICENSE.md is the MIT license!

[alexwilson]

For the header is it worth adding an @license MIT?

[alexwilson]

Given the status of our CHANGELOG, honestly I think it flat-out be worth removing from the scope of this PR so that we can decide what to do with it at a later date. Sorry to be so much trouble!

Could you please also use a slightly more descriptive commit message? Granted there's a lot going in here (arguably it should be split between different PRs due to the wide scope - here's why I'm so much of a stickler about that).

[robfrawley]

@antoligy: Yeah, so I don't even need to read the link you provided to know what you're getting at and agree; this PR ballooned way out of its initial scope and has just kept getting bigger. Best kill it now. ;-)

Closed in favor of #788, #789, #790, and #791.