From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2017 18:18:35 +0100 From: Heiko Carstens Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] s390/virtio: add BSD license to virtio-ccw References: <1511500846-24696-1-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <1511500846-24696-2-git-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <20171124140918.GF4284@osiris> <20171124181148-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20171124165301.GH4284@osiris> <20171124190132-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171124190132-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> Message-Id: <20171124171834.GA2857@osiris> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Archive: List-Post: To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christian Borntraeger , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Huth , Cornelia Huck , Halil Pasic , Martin Schwidefsky List-ID: On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 07:02:41PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 05:53:01PM +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote: > > > > Is there any reason to add the whole BSD 3 clause license text? I'd prefer > > > > if it would be just the simple new SPDX-License-Identifier above. > > I added it for consistency with other virtio headers. Well, one of the points of the SPDX tags is to avoid the countless duplication of license texts. Adding a license text is easy, removing it again later is not as easy. Therefore I would prefer to avoid the duplication here again. Cornelia, Christian, any opinion here? Thanks.