On Tue Feb 11, 2025 at 1:05 PM CET, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 11/02/2025 13:02, André Draszik wrote:
>> On Tue, 2025-02-11 at 11:57 +0000, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
>>> And then I shall s/MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");/MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2");/
>>> everywhere as "GPL" indicates [GNU Public License v2 or later].
>>
>> No, please don't, see Documentation/process/license-rules.rst.
> For the rest of suggestions here I also recommend rereading docs. I
> don't get why we need to change "GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause", but maybe I
> miss some docs. Whatever SPDX recommends is irrelevant if kernel
> recommends for example something else, so be sure you make it aligned
> with actual kernel preference.
Unfortunately, ``Documentation/process/license-rules.rst`` and
``LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0`` are not in 'sync', but I guess that's
(potentially) a discussion for another ML.
TL;DR: ``license-rules.rst`` says "GPL-2.0" while the license file
allows both.
References:
9376ff9ba298 ("LICENSES/GPL2.0: Add GPL-2.0-only/or-later as valid identifiers")
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20180422220833.078058446@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
(which mentions specifying the SPDX version, but that didn't get
implemented)
*sigh*
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
