> On May 22, 2019, at 10:52 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > > I understand that, but I saw new license variants crop up in the past years > which clearly originated from $corp laywers as they were suddenly used in > every new file of that $corp. So yes, there are both ways. *AHHHHHH* ok, good to know. Will add this to my list of drums to bang on when talking to other lawyers… > >>> >>> >>> >> >> in terms of efficiency of process on this: my thinking is that we are >> bound to have files that need cleaning up (for one reason or another) from >> the same copyright holders, as well as files that have similar patterns of >> cleaning up. When it comes to reaching out to people to get them to help >> clean stuff up, I think we’ll get a better response if we collect similar >> things and send one (or minimal #) of correspondence, rather than one >> here, one there, etc. > >> And, yes, we may not be able to get the copyright holders to help in all >> cases where it would be ideal for a number of reasons (can’t find them, >> too many people, etc) - but I think we all agree that is ideal and the >> first point to try for the messy files. There seems to be plenty of >> low-hanging fruit to work on in the meantime and that’s GREAT progress - >> so let’s not lose sight of that either :) > > Sure. I already started to categorize the disclaimer infected files and one > category of the first batch is bound to create headache. That's the stuff > which came (probably) from TI via RidgeRun Ltd. and then got copied into > random places. There are more of those. > >> For whatever we can’t get copyright holders to clean up, we will look at >> adding SPDX identifiers for. But it’s not worth doing that first and then >> having someone clean up the > > I think we really should do things in parallel. > > 1) Contact the copyright holders where possible. > > 2) Prepare some SPDX solution for the cases which are not going to be > resolved. See the other mail for a proposal. > > That way we won't create roadblocks which prevent us to reach a clean state > in a timely manner. If crap gets removed, great. If not, we have to deal > with it no matter what. > got it. I think we have some good ideas starting on the other thread! J.
