On Tue, 21 May 2019, Joe Perches wrote: > On Wed, 2019-05-22 at 13:32 +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > (Perhaps, checkpatch.pl can suggest newer tags in case > > patch submitters do not even know that deprecation.) > > I'd still prefer the kernel use of a single SPDX style. > > I don't know why the -only and -or-later forms were > used for this patch, but I like it. Mostly because the underlying tools use the latest SDPX version. > Is it agreed that the GPL-<v>-only and GPL-<v>-or-later > forms should be preferred for new SPDX identifiers? I have no strong opinion, but using the -only / -or-later variant makes a lot of sense. > If so, I'll submit a checkpatch patch. No objections, but we please have to make it clear that this is not a new playground for s/OLDSTYLE/NEWSTYLE/ scriptkiddies. The compliance tools have to understand both anyway. > I could also wire up a patch to checkpatch and docs to > remove the /* */ > requirement for .h files and prefer > the generic // form for both .c and > .h files as the > current minimum tooling versions now all allow // > comments Yes, that makes sense. The restriction is not longer relevant, but again we are not changing all the existing files for no reason. Thanks, tglx
