On 05/08/2018 11:52 PM, Alex Deucher wrote:
On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 11:41 AM, Dirk Hohndel <dirk@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, May 03, 2018 at 08:46:20AM -0400, Sean Paul wrote:
Thank you for the awesome summary, it is very helpful! So since the boilerplate
has to stay, is there a benefit to adding the SPDX header? Is it just to make
scripting/scraping easier?
Actually, the header now adds the correct information. Without the header
it is not clear that these files are supposed to be dual licensed under
MIT or GPL-2.
Should these (or any of the drm drivers for that matter) be dual
licensed or just MIT? The code is MIT.
Alex
A "grep LICENSE `find . -name '*.c'`" seems to indicate that most if not
all of the drm code and drivers are at least GPL licensed. Many of them
claim "GPL and additional rights".
/Thomas
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
