Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm intending to use the Ms-RL for a project on CodePlex, but I'm not sure how far I should go in terms of how I actually use / embed it in the solution.
Simply including the full licence text somewhere in each project is a given, as is appropriate usage in the project properties / assembly meta-tags; but would you go so far as to include the full licence or (more likely) a short statement pointing to the full licence) at the head of every file?
FYI - The complete solution contains an ASP.NET web project and about 6 'normal' class based projects.
You Could just include one file in a folder or somewhere called License.txt which contains the Ms-RL
But thats realy not a programming question. The admin should (must) close this question
In the end I took the GNU GPL type approach:
A copy of the full licence text with each project (licence.txt).
A 'reference' to the licence file (as well as a small blurb) at the top of each code file.
Of course, throwing a bit of text in the top of each code file might be a simple concept but its not a trivial thing to do if you have multiple projects and files. So in the end I whipped up a small tool to do it for me.
Get it here: http://www.morphological.geek.nz/MorphologicalLicenceInserter/default.aspx (99Kb, full source code, released under Ms-RL).
How to use it:
Copy your code to a staging area (I use RoboCopy).
Crank up the Licence Inserter Tool and have it 'embed' a bit of text (which you write once) into the top of every file you want the reference to appear in.
Check or test the end result of the licence embedding process, and you're good to go.
The program automatically 'wraps' your text in the correct commenting syntax for the file type.
Related
Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 2 years ago.
Improve this question
I am trying to make a web page that gets information about books using HTML and to place the information about books into a database to use it. Any idea of how to take the information from the website open library and store it into a database?
here is the link to the API if needed:
https://openlibrary.org/developers/api
thanks in advance.
If postgreSQL and python is a viable option, LibrariesHacked has a ready-made solution on GitHub for importing and searching Open Library data.
GitHub: LibrariesHacked / openlibrary-search
Using a postgreSQL database it should be possible to import the data directly into tables and then do complex searches with SQL.
Unfortunately the downloads provided are a bit messy. The open library file always errors as the number of columns provided seem to vary. Cleaning it up is difficult as just the text file for editions is 25GB.
That means another python script to clean up the data. The file openlibrary-data-process.py simply reads in the CSV (python is a little more forgiving about dodgy data) and writes it out again, but only if there are 5 columns.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I am building an html resume (with bootstrap tabs) but want to break the sections into separate parts for easy editing and repurposing.
For example, have the work experience data in one file, have education in another and link them to a tabbed html page, but also have the option to export to a docx or pdf. Have skills appear on the html version but not on the pdf export.
What would be the best architecture design to use? Would JSON be good or should I use PHP includes.
What about xml? or should I just maek it a mysql database and use PHP to pull that data (this seems like overkill for less than 1,000 words).
I would argue any of these will be an overkill for a small project. So I'd go placing it all in one html file.
If you want to automatically generate pdf or docs it's no more a html resume. So I won't answer generating part of the question.
As for html management you can use templating language, e.g. Nunjucks or Pug
It will allow you to include html files one in another; the downside is you'll have to setup a build tool like Gulp for this (which will require some basic Javascript knowledge and time).
Something which you need to consider is the format which you would be handing into potential employers.
If you are hoping to hand in a web page, you would probably want to "render" it and not hand in a piece of functioning code. The reason for this, is if the employer/recruiter is unable to open or correctly read the file, this will decrease your chances of getting the job dramatically. Not to mention many large companies use bots which read CV's for you, See this article which explains that matter all to you.
You would also want to consider what some companies/recruiters may think when they see CV.html in their email inbox. Some will think its a really smart and creative idea, others may think it is an incompatible file with their computer and may never open it. Leaving instructions on how to open the document may take time which the employer doesn't have.
I'm not saying its a ludicrous idea, I'm saying you need to properly plan it out. Personally, I would keep an online copy on my website, but I would also have an additional copy (Word document or PDF) which could be downloaded and accessed by those bots which I mentioned early.
In programming there are many ways to do the same thing, and it is entirely up to you and your abilities to find what is best.
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
This question does not appear to be about programming within the scope defined in the help center.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
I found a few questions related to this around here but not exactly what I need. I'm working on a product that uses several LGPL licensed products that I modified and my own code as well. I want to release the product under a LGPL license, I suppose that's fine.
Now, regarding modyifing the code, I have a few questions. Each file contains comments in the header related to the author/product and so on. Should I leave that there and add notes under that regarding the changes made? If so, what about heavily modified files? Also, do I need to have any file that keeps track of all changes? (that sounds like a lot of work)
I would gladly kep the header of the files with the original author intact and add in myself and changes to the file, but is that ok according to the LGPL license? And the last thing, if I'm using the original product as a codebase for my own and I rename files and such, do I edit the original comments to match the new filenames?
Thanks!
Should I leave that there and add notes under that regarding the changes made?
Whatever you do, leave the copyright and license notice(s) intact and don't misrepresent code that you didn't write as your own work. What I sometimes do is add my own copyright notice right above the one from upstream. That makes it clear that I touched the software the last time, so I'm to blame for the bugs.
Also, do I need to have any file that keeps track of all changes? (that sounds like a lot of work)
Put it on an open source code hosting website such as GitHub. That's a good idea anyway, regardless of whether you legally need it. (I don't think you do, but read the LGPL carefully; you have to be able to supply source code for any binary release you did. If you distribute the source code along with the binaries, it should be fine.)
I am not a lawyer.
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
How does one develop a software to read a proprietary file type without having that proprietary software. Something like what the open office folks did with MS Word (.doc) files. Open Office can read .doc files.
That might be easy if the proprietary software has an open source SDK to it, for example Adobe has the Flex open source SDK so it's possible to create flash (.swf) files without having Adobe Flash. But in the case of MS Word, which I believe had no open source SDK, how did the open office guys get it to read it.
Of course I'm using open office just as an example, but my question is general, how could one read a proprietary output file? What's the idea here? I know someone will say reverse engineering, but I don't think reverse engineering the entire software makes sense here (not that I know anything about that field yet) because the goal is not to create software that has the same functionalities. Is there a way to work with the output file only?
Any thoughts on this?
It's an iterative process:
Inspect the stream of raw bytes in the file and make a guess as to what they mean
Write code to verify the guess
See what goes wrong when you try to load the file
Repeat
You'll need a wide variety of test files, a lot of patience and large dollops of insight.
My experience is that it's pretty easy to handle the basics, but that complex file format features can be a pain to handle.
If you are lucky, at least some information on the file for example MS does has information on the doc file.
Other wise it is lot of work. basically you make a simple document save it, then make a small change, save it and compare the two. Eventually you can figure out the format.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
So I have a dependency, actually two dependencies to which I'd like to make changes either right now like fixing JBSEAM-3424 or potentially in the future. The coding is not an issue - I'm capable of making the change - and I'm not seeking to fork the community project, just to have a local version as recommended by Will Hartung to get some work done.
My concern is that issues of process will come up and bite me further down the line. So SO what can I do to ensure I manage this properly. What best practices are there?
Some more specific sub-questions:
Should I change the artifact names?
How choose group artifact and
version names?
Should I import the whole source tree
or be selective?
What if I can't get the build system
working in full - should I scale it
down or try to keep it close to the
original?
Should I change the artifact names?
How choose group artifact and version names?
Keep the groupId and artifactId of the module(s) you change the same, but use a qualifier on the version to ensure that it is obvious it is a non-standard version, for example 1.0.0-simon. This is pretty common practice.
Should I import the whole source tree or be selective?
Update based on your comment: Personally I'd only add the artifacts I've changed to my local source repository. If you change another artifact later then add it to your SCM then.
What if I can't get the build system working in full
Worry about that when it happens. If the project is built with Maven it should be straightforward for you to build only the artifacts you need. If it uses an uber-ant build which you can't get working with your changes, then consider paring the build down.