From: Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
To: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>, dev@dpdk.org
Cc: thomas@monjalon.net, stephen@networkplumber.org,
bruce.richardson@intel.com
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/2] Introducing SPDX License Identifiers
Date: Thu, 7 Dec 2017 15:46:35 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6fa25695-a0da-0357-c769-02d3257bc44c@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1512117499-23412-1-git-send-email-hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
On 12/1/2017 12:38 AM, Hemant Agrawal wrote:
> The DPDK uses the Open Source BSD-3-Clause license for the core libraries
> and drivers. The kernel components are naturally GPLv2 licensed.
>
> Many of the files in the DPDK source code contain the full text of the
> applicable license. For example, most of the BSD-3-Clause files contain a
> full copy of the BSD-3-Clause license text.
>
> Including big blocks of License headers in all files blows up the source
> code with mostly redundant information. An additional problem is that even
> the same licenses are referred to by a number of slightly varying text
> blocks (full, abbreviated, different indentation, line wrapping and/or
> white space, with obsolete address information, ...) which makes validation
> and automatic processing a nightmare.
>
> To make this easier, DPDK is adpoting the use of a single line reference to
> Unique License Identifiers in source files as defined by the Linux
> Foundation's SPDX project [1].
>
> Adding license information in this fashion, rather than adding full license
> text, can be more efficient for developers; decreases errors; and improves
> automated detection of licenses. The current set of valid, predefined SPDX
> identifiers is set forth on the SPDX License List[2]
> at https://spdx.org/licenses/.
>
> For example, to label a file as subject to the BSD-3-Clause license,
> the following text would be used:
>
> Copyright (C) [YEAR] NAME-OF-COPYRIGHT-HOLDER
> SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
>
> To label a file as GPL-2.0 (e.g., for code that runs in the kernel), the
> following text would be used:
>
> Copyright (C) [YEAR] NAME-OF-COPYRIGHT-HOLDER
> SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>
> To label a file as dual-licensed with BSD-3-Clause and GPL-2.0 (e.g., for
> code that is shared between the kernel and userspace), the following text
> would be used:
>
> Copyright (C) [YEAR] NAME-OF-COPYRIGHT-HOLDER
> SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause OR GPL-2.0
>
> To label a file as dual-licensed with BSD-3-Clause and LGPL-2.1 (e.g., for
> code that is shared between the kernel and userspace), the following text
> would be used:
>
> Copyright (C) [YEAR] NAME-OF-COPYRIGHT-HOLDER
> SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause OR LGPL-2.1
>
> Note: Any new file contributions in DPDK shall adhere to the above scheme.
> It is also being recommended to replace the existing license text in the
> code with SPDX-License-Identifiers.
>
> Note 2: DPDK currently adhere to it's IP policies[3]. Any exception to this
> shall be approved by DPDK tech board and DPDK Governing Board. Steps for
> any exception approval:
> 1. Mention the appropriate license identifier form SPDX. If the license is
> not listed in SPDX Licenses. It is the submitters responsibiliity to get
> it first listed.
> 2. Get the required approval from the DPDK Technical Board. Technical board
> may advise the author to check alternate means first. If no other
> alternatives are found and the merit of the contributions are important
> for DPDK's mission, it may decide on such exception with two-thirds vote
> of the members.
> 3. Technical board then approach Governing board for such limited approval
> for the given contribution only.
>
> Any approvals shall be documented in "Licenses/exceptions.txt" with record
> dates.
>
> Note 3: Projects like U-boot have been been using SPDX License Idenfiers
> successfully [2]. They have been referered in implementing SPDX based
> guidelines in DPDK.
>
> Note 4: From the legal point of view, this patch is supposed to be only a
> change to the textual representation of the license information, but in no
> way any change to the actual license terms. With this patch applied, all
> files will still be licensed under the same terms they were before.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
> Acked-by: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> ---
> LICENSE.GPL | 339 ------------------------
> LICENSE.LGPL | 502 ------------------------------------
> Licenses/Exceptions.txt | 12 +
> Licenses/README | 82 ++++++
> Licenses/bsd-3-clause.txt | 9 +
> Licenses/gpl-2.0.txt | 339 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Licenses/lgpl-2.1.txt | 502 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Hi Hemant,
Are new gpl-2.0.txt & lgpl-2.1.txt files identical with old LICENSE.GPL &
LICENSE.LGPL?
If so, does it make sense to make commit with "git mv" so that patch won't
contain all text resulting smaller patch, and it will highlight that nothing
changed but moved/renamed?
Thanks,
ferruh
<....>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-07 23:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-27 7:46 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH " Hemant Agrawal
2017-11-27 7:46 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] Change root makefile license to SPDX tag Hemant Agrawal
2017-11-27 12:01 ` Bruce Richardson
2017-12-01 8:41 ` Hemant Agrawal
2017-11-28 16:59 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 1/2] Introducing SPDX License Identifiers Stephen Hemminger
2017-12-01 8:38 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 " Hemant Agrawal
2017-12-01 8:38 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] Change root makefile license to SPDX tag Hemant Agrawal
2017-12-07 23:46 ` Ferruh Yigit [this message]
2017-12-08 4:57 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/2] Introducing SPDX License Identifiers Hemant Agrawal
2017-12-08 7:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/4] " Hemant Agrawal
2017-12-08 7:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 2/4] change root makefile license to SPDX tag Hemant Agrawal
2017-12-08 7:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 3/4] change NXP dpaa2 code License text to SPDX tags Hemant Agrawal
2017-12-08 18:07 ` Stephen Hemminger
2017-12-08 7:41 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 4/4] change NXP dpaa " Hemant Agrawal
2017-12-13 10:46 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3 1/4] Introducing SPDX License Identifiers Thomas Monjalon
2017-12-13 11:38 ` Bruce Richardson
2017-12-13 15:38 ` Wiles, Keith
2017-12-15 10:52 ` Hemant Agrawal
2017-12-18 12:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 " Hemant Agrawal
2017-12-18 12:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 2/4] change root makefile license to SPDX tag Hemant Agrawal
2017-12-18 14:32 ` Bruce Richardson
2017-12-18 15:52 ` Bruce Richardson
2017-12-18 16:30 ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-12-19 5:29 ` Hemant Agrawal
2017-12-19 10:01 ` Bruce Richardson
2017-12-18 12:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 3/4] change NXP dpaa2 code License text to SPDX tags Hemant Agrawal
2017-12-18 12:39 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4 4/4] change NXP dpaa " Hemant Agrawal
2017-12-19 10:14 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/4] Introducing SPDX License Identifiers Hemant Agrawal
2017-12-19 10:14 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 2/4] change root makefile license to SPDX tag Hemant Agrawal
2017-12-19 10:23 ` Bruce Richardson
2017-12-19 10:14 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 3/4] change NXP dpaa2 code License text to SPDX tags Hemant Agrawal
2017-12-19 10:14 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 4/4] change NXP dpaa " Hemant Agrawal
2018-01-04 18:32 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5 1/4] Introducing SPDX License Identifiers Thomas Monjalon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=6fa25695-a0da-0357-c769-02d3257bc44c@intel.com \
--to=ferruh.yigit@intel.com \
--cc=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=hemant.agrawal@nxp.com \
--cc=stephen@networkplumber.org \
--cc=thomas@monjalon.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).