From: Yang Li <pku.leo@gmail.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linuxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linuxfoundation.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Kate Stewart <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org>,
Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@nexb.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Russell King <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>,
Rob Herring <rob.herring@linaro.org>,
Jonas Oberg <jonas@fsfe.org>, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
Charlemagne Lasse <charlemagnelasse@gmail.com>,
Carmen Bianca Bakker <carmenbianca@fsfe.org>,
"Darrick J. Wong" <darrick.wong@oracle.com>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [patch V5 01/11] Documentation: Add license-rules.rst to describe how to properly identify file licenses
Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2018 14:03:31 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CADRPPNTK1x_47fnk4Tor5QSPk2DEuEwNUQQ4dGu1P3QkQDyZeQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1712282315030.1899@nanos>
On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Dec 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> Sorry for the spam. I somehow missed to refresh the patch before generating
> the mbox. Find below the correct version of that one which has ALL braces
> removed which we don't need.
Hi Thomas,
I'm not sure how we reached the conclusion that we should remove ALL
braces? I cannot find related discussion in the archive except for
the "WITH" case.
This is conflicting with the current SPDX spec at
https://spdx.org/spdx-specification-21-web-version quoted below and
also the explenation in your own file.
Quote from SPDX spec 2.1: More expressive composite license
expressions can be constructed using "OR", "AND", and "WITH" operators
similar to constructing mathematical expressions using arithmetic
operators. For the Tag:value format, any license expression that
consists of more than one license identifier and/or LicenseRef, should
be encapsulated by parentheses: "( )".
> +
> + A <SPDX License Expression> is either an SPDX short form license
> + identifier found on the SPDX License List, or the combination of two
> + SPDX short form license identifiers separated by "WITH" when a license
> + exception applies. When multiple licenses apply, an expression consists
> + of keywords "AND", "OR" separating sub-expressions and surrounded by
> + "(", ")" .
Conflicting with the example
> +
> + License identifiers for licenses like [L]GPL with the 'or later' option
> + are constructed by using a "+" for indicating the 'or later' option.::
> +
> + // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
> + // SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1+
> +
> + WITH should be used when there is a modifier to a license needed.
> + For example, the linux kernel UAPI files use the expression::
> +
> + // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note
> + // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ WITH Linux-syscall-note
> +
> + Other examples using WITH exceptions found in the kernel are::
> +
> + // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 WITH mif-exception
> + // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ WITH GCC-exception-2.0
> +
> + Exceptions can only be used with particular License identifiers. The
> + valid License identifiers are listed in the tags of the exception text
> + file. For details see the point `Exceptions`_ in the chapter `License
> + identifiers`_.
> +
> + OR should be used if the file is dual licensed and only one license is
> + to be selected. For example, some dtsi files are available under dual
> + licenses::
> +
> + // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR BSD-3-Clause
> +
> + Examples from the kernel for license expressions in dual licensed files::
> +
> + // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR MIT
> + // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR BSD-2-Clause
> + // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR Apache-2.0
> + // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR MPL-1.1
> + // SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note) OR MIT
> + // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-1.0+ OR BSD-3-Clause OR OpenSSL
> +
> + AND should be used if the file has multiple licenses whose terms all
> + apply to use the file. For example, if code is inherited from another
> + project and permission has been given to put it in the kernel, but the
> + original license terms need to remain in effect::
> +
> + // SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 WITH Linux-syscall-note) AND MIT
> +
> + Another other example where both sets of license terms need to be
> + adhered to is::
> +
> + // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-1.0+ AND LGPL-2.1+
> +
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-06-12 19:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-28 15:27 [patch V5 00/11] LICENSES: Add documentation and initial License files Thomas Gleixner
2017-12-28 15:27 ` [patch V5 01/11] Documentation: Add license-rules.rst to describe how to properly identify file licenses Thomas Gleixner
2017-12-28 22:17 ` Thomas Gleixner
2017-12-29 13:21 ` Philippe Ombredanne
2017-12-29 16:19 ` Joe Perches
2017-12-29 18:54 ` Theodore Ts'o
2017-12-29 22:17 ` Philippe Ombredanne
2017-12-30 4:15 ` Theodore Ts'o
2018-01-02 2:35 ` Andreas Dilger
2017-12-30 11:02 ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-06-12 19:03 ` Yang Li [this message]
2018-06-12 19:27 ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-06-15 16:55 ` Yang Li
2018-01-02 20:24 ` Darrick J. Wong
2017-12-28 15:27 ` [patch V5 02/11] LICENSES: Add the GPL 2.0 license Thomas Gleixner
2017-12-29 13:24 ` Philippe Ombredanne
2018-01-04 16:25 ` Carmen Bianca Bakker
2018-01-04 20:50 ` Philippe Ombredanne
2017-12-28 15:27 ` [patch V5 03/11] LICENSES: Add the LGPL " Thomas Gleixner
2017-12-28 15:27 ` [patch V5 04/11] LICENSES: Add the LGPL-2.1 license Thomas Gleixner
2017-12-28 15:27 ` [patch V5 05/11] LICENSES: Add the BSD 2-clause "Simplified" license Thomas Gleixner
2017-12-28 15:27 ` [patch V5 06/11] LICENSES: Add the BSD 3-clause "New" or "Revised" License Thomas Gleixner
2017-12-28 15:27 ` [patch V5 07/11] LICENSES: Add the BSD-3-clause "Clear" license Thomas Gleixner
2017-12-28 15:27 ` [patch V5 08/11] LICENSES: Add the MIT license Thomas Gleixner
2017-12-28 15:27 ` [patch V5 09/11] LICENSES: Add Linux syscall note exception Thomas Gleixner
2017-12-28 15:27 ` [patch V5 10/11] LICENSES: Add the GPL 1.0 license Thomas Gleixner
2017-12-28 15:27 ` [patch V5 11/11] LICENSES: Add MPL-1.1 license Thomas Gleixner
2017-12-29 13:42 ` [patch V5 00/11] LICENSES: Add documentation and initial License files Philippe Ombredanne
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CADRPPNTK1x_47fnk4Tor5QSPk2DEuEwNUQQ4dGu1P3QkQDyZeQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=pku.leo@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=carmenbianca@fsfe.org \
--cc=charlemagnelasse@gmail.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=darrick.wong@oracle.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=jonas@fsfe.org \
--cc=kstewart@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pombredanne@nexb.com \
--cc=rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=rob.herring@linaro.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linuxfoundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).