Am 07.09.19 um 15:34 schrieb Jonathan Corbet:
On Thu, 5 Sep 2019 16:57:47 -0300
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The description at Documentation/process/license-rules.rst is very strict
with regards to the position where the SPDX tags should be.
In the past several developers and maintainers interpreted it on a
more permissive way, placing the SPDX header between lines 1 to 15,
with are the ones which the scripts/spdxcheck.py script verifies.
However, recently, devs are becoming more strict about such
requirement and want it to strictly follow the rule, with states that
the SPDX rule should be at the first line ever on most files, and
at the second line for scripts.
Well, for Python script, such requirement causes violation to PEP-263,
making regressions on scripts that contain encoding lines, as PEP-263
also states about the same.
This series addresses it.
So I really don't want to be overly difficult here, but I would like to
approach this from yet another angle...
Patches 1 to 3 fix some Python scripts that violates PEP-263;
I just checked all of those scripts, and they are all just plain ASCII.
So it really doesn't matter whether the environment defaults to UTF-8 or
ASCII here. So, in other words, we really shouldn't need to define the
encoding at all.
Thats what I mean [1] .. lets patch the description in the license-rules.rst::
- first line for the OS (shebang)
- second line for environment (python-encoding, editor-mode, ...)
- third and more lines for application (SPDX use) ..
[1] https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-doc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg33240.html
-- Markus --
This suggests to me that we're adding a bunch of complications that we
don't necessarily need. What am I missing here?
Educate me properly and I'll not try to stand in the way of all this...
Thanks,
jon
