From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: hdegoede@redhat.com (Hans de Goede) Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:28:16 +0200 Subject: [linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v2] arm: sun4i: Add support for Pengpod 1000 tablet In-Reply-To: References: <20180602160313.26763-1-rah@settrans.net> <20180604081302.hcn7j36gt6xeyquq@flea> <313a74ea-0be6-cff1-6b2f-06a4b0b7ba8d@settrans.net> <20180605145038.qptdlcphdbnw6jyg@flea> Message-ID: <4d041794-ba90-a9a6-0886-0ca18dab62b9@redhat.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi, On 05-06-18 20:18, Bob Ham wrote: > On 05/06/18 15:50, Maxime Ripard wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 06:33:02PM +0100, Bob Ham wrote: >>> On 04/06/18 09:13, Maxime Ripard wrote: >>>> On Sat, Jun 02, 2018 at 05:03:13PM +0100, Bob Ham wrote: >>> >>>>> + * This file is dual-licensed: you can use it either under the terms >>>>> + * of the GPL or the X11 license, at your option. Note that this dual >>>>> + * licensing only applies to this file, and not this project as a >>>>> + * whole. >>> >>>>> + * The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be >>>>> + * included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software. >>> >>>> And this is redundant with the SPDX header. >>> >>> The X11 license notice states explicitly that the notice has to be >>> included in the file. Wouldn't removing it be a violation of the license? >> >> The SPDX header is explicitly here to remove the license text and >> create a tag that is in a indirect reference to the license text in >> LICENSES. It's not going away. > > Well, the top bit that I quoted above says that the licenses refer to > only that one file in particular and not the project as a whole. Then > the X11 license states that the notice can't be removed from 'this > software and associated documentation files (the "Software")' which > would seem to refer to the single file. Therefore, removing the notice > from the single file and replacing it with an SPDX header would seem to > violate the license. > > It's a fine point but it makes me nervous. I originally based my .dts > on sun4i-a10-inet1.dts. I've CC'd the original copyright holder, Hans > de Goede. Hans, are you willing to give permission for the license > notice to be replaced with just an SPDX header indicating the dual > licensing? Yes that is fine by me and you've my permission to switch to using just the SPDX header. FWIW I do not believe the "can't be removed from 'this software and associated documentation files (the "Software")'" language applies to the software as a whole and not individual files. > While we're at it, there are a number of other files with the same > license text. Hans, are you prepared to give permission for your other > license notices to be replaced with SPDX headers? Yes you may make the same change to all files with my copyright. Regards, Hans