Add angle brackets and br missing from GPL-2.0 how-to trailer #496
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Same as spdx#494 and LGPL-2.1, plus the missing br
wking
reviewed
Nov 27, 2017
src/GPL-2.0.xml
Outdated
| @@ -280,7 +280,8 @@ | |||
| <p>To do so, attach the following notices to the program. It is safest to attach them to the start of each | |||
| source file to most effectively convey the exclusion of warranty; and each file should have at least | |||
| the "copyright" line and a pointer to where the full notice is found.</p> | |||
| <p>one line to give the program's name and an idea of what it does. Copyright (C) yyyy name of author</p> | |||
| <p><one line to give the program's name and an idea of what it does.> | |||
| <br/>Copyright (C) <yyyy> <name of author></p> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
<br/> looks good to me. I'm having second thoughts about the < and such. They're in the FSF's text version:
$ curl -s https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.txt | grep -A1 'what it does'
<one line to give the program's name and a brief idea of what it does.>
Copyright (C) <year> <name of author>
But the FSF seems to use <var> in HTML:
$ curl -s https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.html | grep -A1 'what it does'
<var>one line to give the program's name and an idea of what it does.</var>
Copyright (C) <var>yyyy</var> <var>name of author</var>
which is perfect, with the W3C including “a term used as a placeholder in prose” as one possible use-case. Although Firefox doesn't seem do style it when used with a <pre>, and we can't put flow content inside <var> (spdx/tools#121).
So my personal preference is to use <optional><</optional> and similar for these.
goneall
approved these changes
Dec 1, 2017
wking
added a commit
to wking/license-list-XML
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 28, 2017
…/plain These changes address the additional differences between the FSF's text/plain version [1] (unchanged since 2007-07-16 according to the Internet Archive [2]) and the FSF's HTML version [3]. There has been previous work in this direction in e9eb557 (Merge pull request spdx#496 from mlinksva/patch-9, 2017-12-15) and f2b71bd (GPL-2.0: Mark postal-code commas as optional, 2017-12-14, spdx#514). The final paragraph ("This General Public License does not permit...") is in both the text/plain and HTML FSF versions. I'm not clear on why it wasn't included in our template (our GPL-3.0 template does include a similar paragraph). I've put it in a new <optional> block to cover folks who were using the text we previously recommended (which lacked the paragraph). [1]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.txt [2]: https://web.archive.org/web/20070716031727/https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.txt [3]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.en.html
wking
added a commit
to wking/license-list-XML
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 16, 2018
These changes address the additional differences between the FSF's text/plain version [1] (unchanged since 2007-07-16 according to the Internet Archive [2]) and the FSF's HTML version [3]. There has been previous work in this direction in e9eb557 (Merge pull request spdx#496 from mlinksva/patch-9, 2017-12-15) and f2b71bd (GPL-2.0: Mark postal-code commas as optional, 2017-12-14, spdx#514). The final paragraph ("This General Public License does not permit...") is in both the text/plain and HTML FSF versions. I'm not clear on why it wasn't included in our template (our GPL-3.0 template does include a similar paragraph). I've put it in a new <optional> block to cover folks who were using the text we previously recommended (which lacked the paragraph). [1]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.txt [2]: https://web.archive.org/web/20070716031727/https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.txt [3]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.en.html
wking
added a commit
to wking/license-list-XML
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 16, 2018
These changes address the additional differences between the FSF's text/plain version [1] (unchanged since 2007-07-16 according to the Internet Archive [2]) and the FSF's HTML version [3]. There has been previous work in this direction in e9eb557 (Merge pull request spdx#496 from mlinksva/patch-9, 2017-12-15) and f2b71bd (GPL-2.0: Mark postal-code commas as optional, 2017-12-14, spdx#514). The final paragraph ("This General Public License does not permit...") is in both the text/plain and HTML FSF versions. I'm not clear on why it wasn't included in our template (our GPL-3.0 template does include a similar paragraph). I've put it in a new <optional> block to cover folks who were using the text we previously recommended (which lacked the paragraph). [1]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.txt [2]: https://web.archive.org/web/20070716031727/https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.txt [3]: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0.en.html
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Same as #494 and LGPL-2.1, plus the missing br