-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 32k
bpo-39883: Use BSD0 license for code in docs #17635
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
c2a80bf
[WIP] Use BSD0 license for code in docs
toddrjen f7a1a42
📜🤖 Added by blurb_it.
blurb-it[bot] 334476f
Set version number for BSD0 license to 3.8.6
toddrjen bc59859
Requested formatting fixes
toddrjen 4c5b396
Insert a blank line
gvanrossum File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions
1
Misc/NEWS.d/next/Documentation/2020-03-07-03-53-39.bpo-39883.1tnb4-.rst
This file contains hidden or 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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1 @@ | ||
Make code, examples, and recipes in the Python documentation be licensed under the more permissive BSD0 license in addition to the existing Python 2.0 license. |
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I presume X.X.X will be 3.9.0. (Also in the LICENSE file.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wasn't sure how long this process will take so I didn't want to commit to a particular release. if it makes it into 3.9.0 that would be great.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would think that this could be backported. If it is, they should also be listed. In any case, good idea.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we can list this as per 3.9.0 even if it doesn't make it in the release (rc2 is scheduled for Sept 14).
Release manager (@ambv) do you think it's reasonable to land this doc-only change?
And I agree we could backport to 3.8.0, in which case we should just say per 3.8.6 (which would be the next release, also going out Sept 14).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@gvanrossum Perfectly reasonable.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
(Both for this to land in 3.8.6rc1 as well as in 3.9.0rc2.)