On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 03:10:34PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Krzysztof, > > CC'ing Greg to get his expert opinion on the topic. > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 06:57:55AM +0200, Krzysztof Hałasa wrote: > > Hi Kieran, and others, > > > > Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > >>> The work is not published under GPL. > > > > > > This seems like an odd thing to say when your patch explicitly contains: > > > > > >> +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/ar0521.c > > >> @@ -0,0 +1,1060 @@ > > >> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > > > Such tags have meaning only in the kernel context, when signed-off etc. Huh? It is a statement of the license of the file itself, it is independent of "Signed-off-by:" which is a legal agreement of a totally different thing and is independent of license type entirely. > > Alone, they aren't legal statements, especially when I explicitly state > > that it's not signed-off-by me yet. Nevertheless... Putting the above line on a file _IS_ a legal declaration that the file is released under GPL-2.0. It's pretty simple :) thanks, greg k-h
