On Sun, May 22, 2022 at 05:06:44PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Sun, May 22 2022 at 16:47, Greg KH wrote: > > On Sun, May 22, 2022 at 04:37:19PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > >> On Fri, Dec 03 2021 at 16:29, Greg KH wrote: > >> > >> While I agree that we want to keep the number of licenses as small as > >> possible, we cannot really dictate which dual licensing options a > >> submitter selects unless the license is GPL-2.0-only incompatible, which > >> copyleft-next is not. > >> > >> Can we just get over this, add the license with the SPDX identifier and > >> move on? > > > > From what I recall, I had technical reasons I didn't take this series, > > but that was a long time ago and I would be glad to review it again if > > it were rebased and resubmitted after the next merge window is closed. > > The license addition and the SPDX identifier cleanup should be seperated > from the new test code which was part of the series. I'll send a re-spin after the merge window and split this up. And FWIW, AFAICT I addressed all the comments, so I can resend after the spdx stuff gets merged so to make the series easier to read / review. Luis
