Re: [PATCH v2] Rework RTEMS licensing discussions.

On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 3:57 PM Joel Sherrill wrote: > > This now captures historical rationale alone with cross-linking > code templates with license guidelines. > > Closes #3962. > --- > eng/coding-conventions.rst | 19 ++- > eng/license-requirements.rst | 81 > ++

Re: [PATCH v2] Rework RTEMS licensing discussions.

Thanks this looks good. Slap my copyright on it too though, I think half the text was lifted from my blog :) On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 6:53 PM Chris Johns wrote: > > On 1/5/20 10:11 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020, 6:18 PM Chris Johns > > wrote: > > > >

Re: [PATCH v2] Rework RTEMS licensing discussions.

On 1/5/20 10:11 am, Joel Sherrill wrote: On Thu, Apr 30, 2020, 6:18 PM Chris Johns > wrote: Hi Joel, This looks good, thanks. I am wondering about references to the wiki and to a "To Be Reviewed" (TBR) page being placed in the documentation. I copied

Re: [PATCH v2] Rework RTEMS licensing discussions.

On Thu, Apr 30, 2020, 6:18 PM Chris Johns wrote: > Hi Joel, > > This looks good, thanks. > > I am wondering about references to the wiki and to a "To Be Reviewed" > (TBR) page being placed in the documentation. I copied that and didn't notice that. There should be a permanent link. And the TBD

Re: [PATCH v2] Rework RTEMS licensing discussions.

Hi Joel, This looks good, thanks. I am wondering about references to the wiki and to a "To Be Reviewed" (TBR) page being placed in the documentation. A released PDF may not have access to the web. For license links should a copy be added to the document therefore held and maintained across re

[PATCH v2] Rework RTEMS licensing discussions.

This now captures historical rationale alone with cross-linking code templates with license guidelines. Closes #3962. --- eng/coding-conventions.rst | 19 ++- eng/license-requirements.rst | 81 +--- 2 files changed, 86 insertions(+), 14 deletions(