Re: License info

Re: License info

[Xose Vazquez Perez]

Larry Finger wrote:

> What is your position regarding license information? Should the standard GPL-V2 
> boiler plate be replaced with "SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0" in wireless files?

"GPL-2.0" tag is deprecated [0] .


It should be used:
for GNU General Public License v2.0 only:     "GPL-2.0-only"
for GNU General Public License v2.0 or later: "GPL-2.0-or-later"



[0] https://spdx.org/licenses/
    https://www.gnu.org/licenses/identify-licenses-clearly.html

Re: License info

[Greg KH]

On Tue, Apr 03, 2018 at 09:53:29PM +0200, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote:
> Larry Finger wrote:
> 
> > What is your position regarding license information? Should the standard GPL-V2 
> > boiler plate be replaced with "SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0" in wireless files?
> 
> "GPL-2.0" tag is deprecated [0] .
> 
> 
> It should be used:
> for GNU General Public License v2.0 only:     "GPL-2.0-only"
> for GNU General Public License v2.0 or later: "GPL-2.0-or-later"

Please read Documentation/process/license-rules.rst.  We are sticking
with the "old" SPDX identifiers for now as they changed after we already
started marking up the kernel source tree.

thanks,

greg k-h

License info

[Larry Finger]

Kalle,

What is your position regarding license information? Should the standard GPL-V2 
boiler plate be replaced with "SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0" in wireless files?

Thanks,

Larry

Re: License info

[Kalle Valo]

Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net> writes:

> What is your position regarding license information? Should the
> standard GPL-V2 boiler plate be replaced with
> "SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0" in wireless files?

I don't think replacing licenses with SPDX identifiers is very
important, but I can apply patches if someone wants to convert drivers.
And at the moment I'm not planning to require SPDX identifiers in new
files.

-- 
Kalle Valo