Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 22 Aug 2018 21:46:13 +0200 | From | Greg Kroah-Hartman <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH V2] license-rules.rst and LICENSES: Use only spdx version 3 with -only and -or-later |
| |
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 09:17:42PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Wed, 22 Aug 2018, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 11:01 AM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote: > > > > > > How likely is it that this is applied at rc1? > > > > I'm staying out of the crazy license name bikeshedding, so it's going > > to be up to the people who have decided they care. > > > > I think whoever *did* care and argued for the change to the SPDX > > format is a hopeless wanker. "GPL-2.0{-only,-or-later}" is in no ways > > better than the "GPL-2.0{,+}" that was in an earlier version of the > > SPDX spec > > > > So I want nothing at all to do with pointless patches. Life is too > > short to deal with this. > > > > Other people disagree, so I expect I will get these kinds of stupid > > noise patches through the usual channels. > > I'm not a great fan of that change either. We have settled on a well > documented and machine readable format. External tools have to be able to > deal with SPDX versions anyway and if we do this now, then we have the next > round of pointless churn in a year when the SPDX folks decide to rename yet > another license identifier which is used in the kernel.
I too agree with Thomas, the SPDX change was crazy, what we have now is fine and we should stick with it.
thanks,
greg k-h
| |