[PATCH v2 0/8] Docs: Add missing SPDX license identifiers of

[PATCH v2 0/8] Docs: Add missing SPDX license identifiers of

[SeongJae Park]

Some subsystem documents are missing SPDX license identifiers on index
files.  This patchset adds those.

Changes from v1
(https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230114194741.115855-2-sj@kernel.org/)
- Separate from index file content changes
- Separate patch for each subsystem doc (Alex Deucher)
- Use MIT license for gpu (Alex Deucher)

SeongJae Park (8):
  Docs/crypto/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
  Docs/driver-api/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
  Docs/gpu/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
  Docs/hwmon/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
  Docs/input/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
  Docs/mm/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
  Docs/scheduler/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
  Docs/sound/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier

 Documentation/crypto/index.rst     | 2 ++
 Documentation/driver-api/index.rst | 2 ++
 Documentation/gpu/index.rst        | 2 ++
 Documentation/hwmon/index.rst      | 2 ++
 Documentation/input/index.rst      | 2 ++
 Documentation/mm/index.rst         | 2 ++
 Documentation/scheduler/index.rst  | 2 ++
 Documentation/sound/index.rst      | 2 ++
 8 files changed, 16 insertions(+)

-- 
2.25.1

[PATCH v2 3/8] Docs/gpu/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier

[SeongJae Park]

Add missing SPDX License Identifier for gpu documentation index file.

Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>
---
 Documentation/gpu/index.rst | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/Documentation/gpu/index.rst b/Documentation/gpu/index.rst
index eee5996acf2c..9a6c7831d7fe 100644
--- a/Documentation/gpu/index.rst
+++ b/Documentation/gpu/index.rst
@@ -1,3 +1,5 @@
+.. SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
+
 ============================
 GPU Driver Developer's Guide
 ============================
-- 
2.25.1

Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Docs: Add missing SPDX license identifiers of

[Jonathan Corbet]

SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org> writes:

> Some subsystem documents are missing SPDX license identifiers on index
> files.  This patchset adds those.

Documentation/ is far behind on the SPDX front, and I'm all in favor of
fixing that.  I do worry, though, about sticking license declarations
onto files that did not previously have them; do we know what the
original contributor's intent was?

> Changes from v1
> (https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230114194741.115855-2-sj@kernel.org/)
> - Separate from index file content changes
> - Separate patch for each subsystem doc (Alex Deucher)
> - Use MIT license for gpu (Alex Deucher)
>
> SeongJae Park (8):
>   Docs/crypto/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
>   Docs/driver-api/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
>   Docs/gpu/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
>   Docs/hwmon/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
>   Docs/input/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
>   Docs/mm/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
>   Docs/scheduler/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
>   Docs/sound/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
>
>  Documentation/crypto/index.rst     | 2 ++
>  Documentation/driver-api/index.rst | 2 ++

I added this one, and GPLv2 is fine there.

>  Documentation/gpu/index.rst        | 2 ++
>  Documentation/hwmon/index.rst      | 2 ++
>  Documentation/input/index.rst      | 2 ++
>  Documentation/mm/index.rst         | 2 ++
>  Documentation/scheduler/index.rst  | 2 ++
>  Documentation/sound/index.rst      | 2 ++
>  8 files changed, 16 insertions(+)

Thanks,

jon

Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Docs: Add missing SPDX license identifiers of

[Jonathan Corbet]

SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org> writes:

> Some subsystem documents are missing SPDX license identifiers on index
> files.  This patchset adds those.
>
> Changes from v1
> (https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230114194741.115855-2-sj@kernel.org/)
> - Separate from index file content changes
> - Separate patch for each subsystem doc (Alex Deucher)
> - Use MIT license for gpu (Alex Deucher)
>
> SeongJae Park (8):
>   Docs/crypto/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
>   Docs/driver-api/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
>   Docs/gpu/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
>   Docs/hwmon/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
>   Docs/input/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
>   Docs/mm/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
>   Docs/scheduler/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
>   Docs/sound/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier

So I've applied patches 2 (since I wrote the initial file) and 8 (with
Takashi's ack).  The others are also fine, I think, but I hesitate to
apply license texts to files without knowing that they match the
author's intent.  I hate to say it, but I think the best approach is to
send each of the remaining patches to the appropriate maintainers for
the subsystem involved.

Thanks,

jon

Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] Docs: Add missing SPDX license identifiers of

[SeongJae Park]

On Tue, 24 Jan 2023 15:31:04 -0700 Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net> wrote:

> SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org> writes:
> 
> > Some subsystem documents are missing SPDX license identifiers on index
> > files.  This patchset adds those.
> >
> > Changes from v1
> > (https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20230114194741.115855-2-sj@kernel.org/)
> > - Separate from index file content changes
> > - Separate patch for each subsystem doc (Alex Deucher)
> > - Use MIT license for gpu (Alex Deucher)
> >
> > SeongJae Park (8):
> >   Docs/crypto/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
> >   Docs/driver-api/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
> >   Docs/gpu/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
> >   Docs/hwmon/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
> >   Docs/input/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
> >   Docs/mm/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
> >   Docs/scheduler/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
> >   Docs/sound/index: Add missing SPDX License Identifier
> 
> So I've applied patches 2 (since I wrote the initial file) and 8 (with
> Takashi's ack).  The others are also fine, I think, but I hesitate to
> apply license texts to files without knowing that they match the
> author's intent.  I hate to say it, but I think the best approach is to
> send each of the remaining patches to the appropriate maintainers for
> the subsystem involved.

That makes 100% sense, thank you, Jon!


Thanks,
SJ

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> jon