Fixed Apache 2.0 redistribution wording.

[bkuhlmann]

Overview

Removed dangling use of ; and after each ordered list item. In the
original Apache 2.0 license this reads better but with the inclusion of
the No Harm variant, it doesn't read as well.

Applied minor cleanup to word wrapping so paragraphs and list items are
capped at a column width of 100 characters as done when first
submitted.

Proposed Resolution

Resolution is included in this commit. Only minor formatting applied.

[chrisjensen]

Sorry for the slow response on this Brooke, we've all been pretty busy lately. Aiming to get through the backlog here later this month

[ghost]

@bkuhlmann, @chrisjensen,
I'm already on a fix for this issue. See PR #79 and this commit on my fork.

[bkuhlmann]

Hey Ivan, thanks. I'm not sure I can comment on this except that the commits are hard to read and not atomic. There is a lot going on the code review (i.e. a mix of different ideas being tackled at once). So my first reaction is to slim this down and make it simpler to parse.

That said, the dropping of the semi-colons is nice.

I'll defer the rest of this to Chris as I was under the impression this project was dead and have moved on to using the Hippocratic License, myself, so was surprised to see new activity pop up here.

[ghost]

I'm surprised too. I'll look into that type of commit format. The PR I'm working on has a few comments on status updates to help see what's going on. I'm using my editor to push commits, and it's limited to 50 characters on the commit message anyways.

[ghost]

There is a lot going on the code review (i.e. a mix of different ideas being tackled at once).

I see what you mean. It is a small change to the end result (the NoHarm.md), but this is a big overhaul under the hood. The reason I created my PR is to add a new way to break up a huge problem (e.g. how to write a license) into many separate smaller problems (e.g. how to make and format the definitions, the terms of redistribution, etc.). As doing this is a very drastic change, I had to work on many files (with seemingly different goals) at once to make sure that everything works properly. I create/edit the data in ./sources/data.js, I then update the template logic and ./sources/context.js (for needed functionality to join text properly, like A, B, and C, and trim the definitions and terms to fit the markdown spec) as needed, and finally, I run the build script to make sure that the changes work. I repeat that process for every part of the license.

[bkuhlmann]

Yeah, so there is a flow to reading code reviews and you generally don't want to mix multiple ideas/topics at once. It's hard on the reviewers but also hard on the author to get accepted. You only want to tell a complete, well architected, story. Then the review is better for all involved. 😉

Anyway, I can't review this code since I'm not the author. I would have to defer to Chris since my original code review only wanted to address the semicolon problem. What's in your code review is beyond the scope of my original intent.

[ghost]

I understand. I think @tommaitland is taking over right now. :) On Friday, August 5, 2022 at 01:34:09 PM CDT, Brooke Kuhlmann ***@***.***> wrote: Yeah, so there is a flow to reading code reviews and you generally don't want to mix multiple ideas/topics at once. It's hard on the reviewers but also hard on the author to get accepted. You only want to tell a complete, well architected, story. Then the review is better for all involved. 😉 Anyway, I can't review this code since I'm not the author. I would have to defer to Chris since my original code review only wanted to address the semicolon problem. What's in your code review is beyond the scope of my original intent. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe. You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[ghost]

@bkuhlmann, I am starting to see why you closed this PR. @realpixelcode and I marked our respective PRs (#80 and #79) as stale, and I decided to close mine today :(. I've actually been monitoring the issue tracker and had to sound the alarm about a few weeks ago (#83); I am pretty much the only one providing assistance on the help wanted issues and open PRs as well. Although I plan on using the Do No Harm license once it is stable, I am starting to look into the Hippocratic License, which I think they're in v3 now. If I had writer's access to this repo, I could help get the pipeline going, and I would probably add stale to this repo's actions.

[tommaitland]

@IRod22 I've reviewed @realpixelcode's PR and added a comment on yours. The repository isn't dead, but it also doesn't need to move quickly – we're just spending what time on it when we can.

[ghost]

Got it, sorry.