Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] net: update licence for network headers

[Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>]

On 12/12/2017 10:27 PM, Olivier MATZ wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 09:56:40AM -0800, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>> On 12/10/2017 9:27 PM, Hemant Agrawal wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> 	Most templates are showing copyright first and SPDX later i.e. the
>>> typical way for writing the license.
>>>
>>> However some projects has followed it other way around to make it easy
>>> for tools i.e. the TOP line.
>>>
>>> I agree with Ferruh that we shall follow single convention.  I will
>>> prefer to do it in following way to make it consistent. (I will also fix
>>> my change patches).
>>>
>>>  >> Copyright (C) [YEAR] NAME-OF-COPYRIGHT-HOLDER
>>>  >> Copyright (C) [YEAR] NAME-OF-COPYRIGHT-HOLDER-2
>>>  >> Copyright (C) [YEAR] NAME-OF-COPYRIGHT-HOLDER-3
>>>  >> SPDX-License-Identifier:        BSD-3-Clause
>>
>> Stephen mentioned Linux already has a defined syntax for this, unless there is a
>> good reason to change I think we can follow same syntax, what do you think?
>
> As far as I can see, it's not yet integrated in Linux. The latest
> documentation I can find as of today is:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10091607/
>
> About the first line:
>
> """
>    The SPDX license identifier in kernel files shall be added at the first
>    possible line in a file which can contain a comment.  For the majority
> """
>
> Some recomandations look a bit inconsistent to me, but I didn't follow
> all the history:
>
> """
>       C source:	// SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression>
>       C header:	/* SPDX-License-Identifier: <SPDX License Expression> */
> """
>
>

I tried to study the other repositories using the SPDX tagging e.g. 
uboot (http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=tree) and odp etc. They 
followed the syntax of copyright followed by SPDX.

Also, typically all dpdk files starts with "/*-", I am not sure about 
the purpose of the "-"?



> Olivier
>