On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 08:16:45PM +0200, Philippe Ombredanne wrote: > Hi Fabio, > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 2:55 PM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 3:30 AM, Wolfram Sang <wsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >>> > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later > >>> > >>> According to Documentation/process/license-rules.rst the format should > >>> be like this instead: > >>> > >>> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > >> > >> According to https://spdx.org/licenses/ it should be what I did above. > > > > Previous advice I saw was to follow the format described in > > Documentation/process/license-rules.rst > > > > Greg/Philippe, > > > > Any inputs on this matter? > > > > Thanks > > IMHO we should always treat and use the > Documentation/process/license-rules.rst as the reference and not SPDX > proper who moves at its own pace and evolves its specs and license ids > independently of where we stand in the kernel. > If this is not right Doc patches are welcomed! > In this is very specific case this has been discussed on list a few > times. If I recall correctly Thomas also had an opinion on this... > So you are correct and this should be for now: > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ That is correct, stick with that format/version for now please. thanks, greg k-h
