streamlining text about licensing #144
Conversation
README.md
Outdated
| Product licensing for your workflow depends on your project visibility as well as the type of products to set up: | ||
| Product licensing for your workflow depends on your project visibility as well as the types of products the workflow uses: | ||
|
|
||
| - Public project — The action automatically licenses all products for you, except for transformation products, such as MATLAB Coder and MATLAB Compiler. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it safe to say, "The Setup MATLAB action?" Is this the action that performs the licensing?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The Setup MATLAB action is not the action that performs licensing. It's actually the Run* actions that handle licensing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does the clarification help?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think I prefer what you had before. Perhaps "Product licensing for your workflow depends on your project visibility as well as the types of products you run:"?
Can we get away from saying "The action automatically licenses", which is not technically true? What about something like "The Run MATLAB Build, Run MATLAB Tests, and Run MATLAB Command actions automatically license ..."?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I made some changes based on our conversation.
README.md
Outdated
| @@ -150,11 +150,13 @@ If you are using a macOS runner with an Apple silicon processor, verify that Jav | |||
| >**Tip:** One convenient way to include the required dependencies on a self-hosted runner is to specify the [MATLAB Dependencies container image on Docker® Hub](https://hub.docker.com/r/mathworks/matlab-deps) in your workflow. | |||
|
|
|||
| #### Licensing | |||
| Product licensing for your workflow depends on your project visibility as well as the type of products to set up: | |||
| Product licensing for your workflow depends on your project visibility as well as the types of products the workflow uses: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's kind of tricky to figure out where to put this, but I think the right place is probably on run-tests, run-command and run-build
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I guess that we already have it here right now and as far as I know we haven't gotten complaints so maybe this is the right place to put it despite the fact that the actual licensing happens in the Run* actions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree. Let's keep the text where it is. I added a few links, though. What do you think?
No description provided.