Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 16 Nov 2017 14:12:19 +0100 (CET) | From | Thomas Gleixner <> | Subject | Re: [patch 2/7] LICENSES: Add the GPL 2.0 license |
| |
Jonas,
On Thu, 16 Nov 2017, Jonas Oberg wrote:
> Hi Thomas, > > I do appreciate your work on this, it's a welcome addition! > > > +SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 // GPLv2 only > > +SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ // GPLv2 or later > > I am concerned about this though, as the SPDX-License-Identifier is well > known to refer to the license of the document in which it appears, and > it would be beneficial to avoid a situation where a tool reading this > make the assumption the license text itself it under a particular > license. Essentially, let's avoid overloading if we can.
Makes sense
> >From my reading, there are two intentions with the above reading: > > 1) To give usage guidelines and signal that for any source file, adding > this exact line would be a valid license identifier, and > 2) To make the license identifiers computer understandable such that > tools can be updated to validate whether source code includes a > license identifier which corresponds to one of the licenses in > LICENSES/ > > I'd propose to not try to do both at the same time and would propose > a 'Valid-License-Identifier' tag to meet your second criteria, and > a 'Usage-Guidance' tag to meet your first one. The header would then > be: > > Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ > Usage-Guidance: > To use this license in source code, you can use either of the following tags > and values: > . > SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 // For GPLv2 only > SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ // For GPLv2 or any later version
I can live with that.
Thanks for looking over this!
tglx
| |