From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: update licence for network headers
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 10:43:05 +0530
Message-ID: <1018d643-eb39-cd23-4094-9ae2a4bcd860@nxp.com>
References: <20171208102830.2817-1-olivier.matz@6wind.com>
 <eb74dade-439e-dbf4-0455-26100755dd23@intel.com>
 <f43f61fb-3630-03ba-6328-5935276e1975@solarflare.com>
 <448cfe74-224b-8a25-6be3-42c70c6ac514@nxp.com>
 <cf86b313-5e9b-c8c0-ccb8-31afc77c2139@intel.com>
 <20171212165744.v2zsffollkwj54az@platinum>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Andrew Rybchenko <arybchenko@solarflare.com>, <dev@dpdk.org>, Thomas
 Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>, Stephen Hemminger
 <stephen@networkplumber.org>
To: Olivier MATZ <olivier.matz@6wind.com>, Ferruh Yigit
 <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from NAM03-CO1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
 (mail-co1nam03on0079.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.40.79])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94FCB1DBF
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 06:13:11 +0100 (CET)
In-Reply-To: <20171212165744.v2zsffollkwj54az@platinum>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

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
>