Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Reinserting deleted text for concludedLicense and declaredLicense #466

Closed
swinslow opened this issue Aug 2, 2023 · 5 comments
Closed

Reinserting deleted text for concludedLicense and declaredLicense #466

swinslow opened this issue Aug 2, 2023 · 5 comments

Comments

@swinslow
Copy link
Member

swinslow commented Aug 2, 2023

In #448 it looks like a lot of context details for concludedLicense and declaredLicense were deleted as part of moving them from properties to relationships.

The content in the "Description" parts of those files is key to the meanings of concludedLicense and declaredLicense, and was part of addressing some specific complaints from 2.x.

I'm happy to submit a PR to reinsert it, but not sure where it should be placed for relationships. Just want to make sure it doesn't get dropped. Thanks!

@swinslow swinslow added this to the 3.0-rc2 milestone Aug 2, 2023
@goneall
Copy link
Member

goneall commented Aug 2, 2023

@swinslow Agree - as the one who dropped it ;) Currently, there is only a short summary for each relationship in the relationship types.

One idea is to add the full context in the profile's markdown file and create a reference to that markdown file in the summary descriptions.

Now, the question is, which profile do we add this to?

There is a related issue in that we are not capturing the additional restrictions in either profile markdown.

I'm thinking we create yet one more licensing related profile Licensing which contains nothing but documentation and restrictions. We would use SimpleLicensing and ExpandedLicensing for only namespace purposes.

If this make sense, I can create a proposal.

Note - this is related to issue #463

@goneall
Copy link
Member

goneall commented Aug 17, 2023

Ping @zvr @swinslow - Should I create a PR proposal for this approach?

Per Jilayne's comment below, it looks like we already have the text in PR #456

@jlovejoy
Copy link
Member

I think #456 adds the missing text?

@goneall
Copy link
Member

goneall commented Aug 17, 2023

I think #456 adds the missing text?

It does - I'll delete my comment above. I guess I already added it to the previous PR.

Thanks for catching this @jlovejoy

@goneall
Copy link
Member

goneall commented Sep 19, 2023

This is fixed with #456 - closing the issue

@goneall goneall closed this as completed Sep 19, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants