From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ms.lwn.net ([45.79.88.28]:40104 "EHLO ms.lwn.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726571AbeJOWON (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Oct 2018 18:14:13 -0400 Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2018 08:28:41 -0600 From: Jonathan Corbet Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/22] xfs-4.20: major documentation surgery Message-ID: <20181015082841.2b6815ee@lwn.net> In-Reply-To: <20181015095549.GA23946@infradead.org> References: <153862669110.26427.16504658853992750743.stgit@magnolia> <20181006005154.GM12041@dastard> <20181011112735.4f696d8a@lwn.net> <20181015095549.GA23946@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Dave Chinner , "Darrick J. Wong" , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Matthew Wilcox On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 02:55:49 -0700 Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > OK, I've had a long conversation with the LF lawyer, and she said clearly > > that we really should not be introducing CC-SA material into the kernel > > source tree. It's a pain; I really do like CC-SA better for > > documentation, but it's not GPL-compatible, and that creates a problem for > > the processed docs. > > That was exactly my concern with this patchset. > > Btw, I think we have the same issue with idr.rst, and unless we can > relicense it we should drop it from the tree, as it actually includes > kernel source files. ...and a significant DOC section at that, not just function prototypes. I'd already asked Willy [CC'd] about this once, haven't gotten an answer yet. Hopefully we can address this once he comes back around. Thanks, jon