On 9/12/2016 6:45 PM, Michael Dolan
wrote:
Mike, one quick (I think) question. Was
there a reason for the particular phrase/words "documentation
source" under the definition of "Source Code" and what is the
scope of "documentation source"? Would "documentation comment
in the source code" perhaps be a more accurate description?
We've had some confusion in the past
over the extent to which documentation was under a project
source code license or for example Creative Commons. Some
projects have a license for source code and a different
license (typically CC) for the official project documentation
(e.g. a wiki, install guides, user guides, API documentation,
etc). Some projects have their documentation in .md files in
GitHub.
I was just trying to understand where
the EPL license ends and the CC license begins for projects
trying to use both one license for source and another for
project documentation.
Mike,
No, the inclusion of "documentation source" was intentional. It
is there largely to be consistent with EPL 1.0, which defines
Contribution as:
"Contribution" means:
a) in the case of the initial Contributor, the initial
code and *documentation* distributed under this
Agreement....
So historically, at least, the EPL has
always been intended to cover both the code and the related
documentation.
Does that answer your question?
--
Mike Milinkovich
mike.milinkovich@xxxxxxxxxxx
+1.613.220.3223 (mobile)
@mmilinkov
