Confirm with Particular that what I have here is ok

[gep13]

[gep13]

@SimonCropp ok, so this is the project that I was telling you about. I have taken the existing Particular Project from here: https://github.com/Particular/GitHubReleaseNotes and made a few modifications, and I wanted to confirm with you what else needs to be done to ensure that I am doing things "right" in terms of the MIT license.

What I have done breaks down to the following high level items:

• Renamed Projects to GitHubReleaseManager, rather than GitHubReleaseNotes as I felt this better describes the intent of the application
• Added psake as orchestrator of Build Process
• Added StyleCop to Build Process
• Added Code Analysis to Build Process
• Added DupFinder to Build Process
• Added InspectCode to Build Process
• Added new nuget package for DLL of GitHubReleaseManager (in addition to exe nuget packages), which could be consumed in other applications. DLL will be deployed to nuget, exe will be deployed to chocolatey
• Added new functionality to Export all Release Notes, Close Milestone, Add Individual Assets
• Added ability to configure options for both Release Notes generation, and export. This uses a YAML configuration file, very similar to what GitVersion does. This includes the ability to say what labels should be used, which ones should be ignored, whether to include the footer, what text to include in footer, etc.
• Removed Particular specific "things" i.e. mention of your Repo's for the Integration Tests. Not that I could, but I didn't want to make any changes/problems for your repos, so I thought it best to use other repo's that I am in control of
• Removed GitVersionTask in favour of running GitVersion.exe
• Removed NugetPackager, in favour of doing this within psake build script

So, a couple questions that I have that I am hoping you can help with.

• As per the MIT license on https://github.com/Particular/GitHubReleaseNotes I have left the LICENSE.md file in tact in this repository. Do you know if I simply add to this to apply my own copyright, or do I need to create another file? If another file, any ideas on what this would be named?
• One of the StyleCop rules is to apply a Copyright Header to all .cs files. Now, I have done that, using a Copyright Header including me, i.e. gep13. Was this the "right" thing to do? I have basically modified all the files to fit in with my way of doing things, in terms of naming conventions, etc, but I am wondering whether the Particular Copyright should be included as well. I am happy to add this in, hence the reason for creating this issue :-)

Please let me know if you have any questions/concerns, and I am happy to make any changes that you deem required.

Would also love some feedback as to what the new version of the application does. You can see it in action here:

Create Release:
https://github.com/chocolatey/ChocolateyGUI/blob/develop/BuildScripts/default.ps1#L651

Export Release Notes:
https://github.com/chocolatey/ChocolateyGUI/blob/develop/BuildScripts/default.ps1#L669

Upload Assets to Release:
https://github.com/chocolatey/ChocolateyGUI/blob/develop/BuildScripts/default.ps1#L686

Close Milestone:
https://github.com/chocolatey/ChocolateyGUI/blob/develop/BuildScripts/default.ps1#L686

So now, the workflow for ChocolateyGUI looks something like this:

• Create Pull Request into master
• Build executes with no deployment, or creation of release
• Merge into master
• Build executes with deployment to MyGet, and creation of release notes
• Manually go to GitHub and confirm that the release notes are correct. Use deployment to MyGet for final testing of application
• Publish the release, which assigns a tag to the repository
• Build executes, which exports the release notes and includes them in generated MSI, milestone is closed, publish to chocolatey, upload assets to GitHub

Personally, I think this has come together really nicely, but again, I would love to hear your thoughts on it.

Thanks!

[gep13]

At the minute, I have left the README.md to be the same as it was, but I would plan to update that also to make it specific to this repository. I would also be here that I would make it clear where the origin's of this project comes from.

[SimonCropp]

@gep13 I am happy for you to apply "this is not a substantial portions of the Software" provision of MIT and remove that copywrite if you want to apply your own. MIT is more about stopping us from getting sued than "maintaining a trail of who wrote what". And witht he changes you are doing it is more a case of "inspired by our work" than "copying it". Happy instead with a small blurb at the bottom of your readme along the lines of "inspired by code written by particular software"

[SimonCropp]

re the rule "One of the StyleCop rules is to apply a Copyright Header to all .cs files. ". i detest that approach. now every time i open a cs file there is a waste of my screen before i can see the actual class.

I would just drop it. most projects dont follow it

[gep13]

Thanks for getting back to me. I will make the necessary changes and maybe follow up with you after that. 👍

[gep13]

I believe I have made the required changes here. You can see the addition in the Readme Documentation here:

https://github.com/gep13/GitHubReleaseManager#credits

Going to close this issue, but let me know if there is anything else I need to do.