Hi Greg, On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 4:02 PM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 03:51:18PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 3:24 PM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 09:17:06AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > > On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 3:49 AM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > The following changes since commit cd6c84d8f0cdc911df435bb075ba22ce3c605b07: > > > > > > > > > > Linux 5.2-rc2 (2019-05-26 16:49:19 -0700) > > > > > > > > > > are available in the Git repository at: > > > > > > > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/driver-core.git tags/spdx-5.2-rc3-1 > > > > > > > > > > for you to fetch changes up to 96ac6d435100450f0565708d9b885ea2a7400e0a: > > > > > > > > > > treewide: Add SPDX license identifier - Kbuild (2019-05-30 11:32:33 -0700) > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > SPDX update for 5.2-rc3, round 1 > > > > > > > > > > Here is another set of reviewed patches that adds SPDX tags to different > > > > > kernel files, based on a set of rules that are being used to parse the > > > > > comments to try to determine that the license of the file is > > > > > "GPL-2.0-or-later" or "GPL-2.0-only". Only the "obvious" versions of > > > > > these matches are included here, a number of "non-obvious" variants of > > > > > text have been found but those have been postponed for later review and > > > > > analysis. > > > > > > > > > > There is also a patch in here to add the proper SPDX header to a bunch > > > > > of Kbuild files that we have missed in the past due to new files being > > > > > added and forgetting that Kbuild uses two different file names for > > > > > Makefiles. This issue was reported by the Kbuild maintainer. > > > > > > > > > > These patches have been out for review on the linux-spdx@vger mailing > > > > > list, and while they were created by automatic tools, they were > > > > > hand-verified by a bunch of different people, all whom names are on the > > > > > patches are reviewers. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > I'm sorry, but as long[*] as this does not conform to > > > > Documentation/process/license-rules.rst, I have to provide my: > > > > NAked-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > [*] The obvious solution is to update Documentation/process/license-rules.rst, > > > > as people have asked before. > > > > > > I don't understand, what does not conform? We are trying _to_ conform > > > to that file, what did we do wrong? > > > > The new "-or-later" and "-only" variants are not (yet) documented in that file. > > > > File format examples:: > > > > Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > > SPDX-URL: https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-2.0.html > > Usage-Guide: > > To use this license in source code, put one of the following SPDX > > tag/value pairs into a comment according to the placement > > guidelines in the licensing rules documentation. > > For 'GNU General Public License (GPL) version 2 only' use: > > SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > > For 'GNU General Public License (GPL) version 2 or any later > > version' use: > > SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > > > They do not have to be documented in that file. As what you quoted > said, "File format examples::" My bad, I should have quoted the syntax rule: License identifiers for licenses like [L]GPL with the 'or later' option are constructed by using a "+" for indicating the 'or later' option.:: // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ // SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1+ Yes, this also predates the notion of "-only", so that is not documented there. > Please look in the files in the LICENSES directory for what all of the > documented identifiers should look like: > $ head -n 4 LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0 > Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only > Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later Oh, so we can no longer look it up in a single place :-( I'm used to grepping in Documentation/process/license-rules.rst, as I don't know the exact syntax by heart. > If you want, please send a patch to fix up the documentation example, > but it is not incorrect :) May do, when I find a hole in my time/space continuum... Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
