Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [epl-discuss] Next Round of Proposed Revisions to the EPL

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.


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
+1.613.220.3223 (mobile)

Back to the top