From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AEDA1B026 for ; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 09:15:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18566225E7; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 03:15:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 24 Jan 2018 03:15:11 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=v+/0FhkbaSDE+pO5kjDqdEat6m kzC8DGycdUOESb+Xo=; b=rrh4Zp1UmKmG0WAuYCU7pqYQGHTe4ifw0G6D817eB0 09MiVZwCkH/WMH8tVQ1qZ+vhT+lFkOpJiJJ4siRXjrhCyJNrsjC/ynyxpqjHSqzq cAb6cTW56GDJRL2GfbyOQlqJlVpRXALPrjRJo90XPynlAIkqXkxCJ/smImCQGIWI Q= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=v+/0Fh kbaSDE+pO5kjDqdEat6mkzC8DGycdUOESb+Xo=; b=FPbzrGme6a1OtYThw1d346 CYGQ6qor9KdsWjr1WcvwxBLNYqC5Np4adeQHnkC8qTAdKYTcRDg/Mw+pcWMhjtpT M6VtFpQbJIvtHilCLCOYIymPc5Du6eDnB/x6JVm8z03HIPOEoMtJ97ZA1AgJaKDV T74uzaNcWbV184RGXDC4F8EnGU+Y3WLlp3sXlvL2pcvsKlJJOBcK3IzUDv3nqlgI sMGXy+MWF/APsLoQqDJFT37oba7Fvnkuu+ADI2tM76rq0ILXkffOf5ogY5M3SIvg 9peYGYRskXanCeetgulJ4odpVBGjFR8sk7GQUV3dmnZIHTapp8b3qr692n5hZ8TA == X-ME-Sender: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C4053240DE; Wed, 24 Jan 2018 03:15:10 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Hemant Agrawal Cc: Ferruh Yigit , dev@dpdk.org Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 09:14:29 +0100 Message-ID: <9100236.kIqJc6xL1O@xps> In-Reply-To: References: <20180109163530.19004-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <2697444.chTTJ4k8vY@xps> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/3] doc: convert license headers to SPDX tags X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 08:15:11 -0000 24/01/2018 06:48, Hemant Agrawal: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > 23/01/2018 16:19, Hemant Agrawal: > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas@monjalon.net] > > > > > > > 23/01/2018 14:08, Hemant Agrawal: > > > > > This patch will be good if you only add SPDX to it and NOT remove > > > > > the > > > > original license text. > > > > > i.e. only do following: > > > > > > > > > > > -.. BSD LICENSE > > > > > > +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause > > > > > > > > > > Around RC2 timeframe, I intend to do that. All the remaining but > > > > > valid > > > > license files, we will add SPDX and NOT remove the license text. > > > > > > > > Hemant, I don't understand why? > > > [Hemant] > > > > > > Changing license for someone else copyright needs their ACK. However > > > we can add SPDX without modifying existing license text There are large > > number of other copyrights and not everyone is converting their license to > > SPDX only. > > > > > > In case of linux kernel and uboot, as a first step they just added SPDX to > > all files without removing the license text. > > > > > > I was thinking of doing the same so that all the files in DPDK should have > > SPDX. However, we will not SPDX to files, which are not complaint to DPDK > > policy. > > > We will deal with them separately. > > > > If we don't remove the license now, it will never happen. > > I have the same fear. But we can not remove other's license text without their explicit approval. > > W.r.t DPDK project priorities: License compliance is important than cleanup. > > Let's target following: > 1. 100% compliance by 18.05 > 2. 100% Cleanup by 18.08 or 18.11 Why do you assume we cannot get the author's approval quickly? We did not try. Let's try to do compliance and cleanup at the same time.