[U-Boot] SPDX-License-Identifier on new files

[U-Boot] SPDX-License-Identifier on new files

[D Rambo]

Is there a policy that new source files upstreamed to u-boot contain
registered SPDX license identifiers? I see that there are still about 1900
source files that have no SPDX identifier, and about 6000 that do. The
reason I'm asking is that our company has a dual license (for GPL2.0 or
Proprietary), and would like to know if it is possible to submit code that
has the legacy dual license first (and register/clean up SPDX later), or if
we need to do the internal legal and register the appropriate licenses with
spdx.org first before submission upstream?

Another question is related to http://spdx.org/about-spdx/faqs

       *How does one represent a file or package that is dual licensed
(i.e., a license choice)?*

       SPDX license information can be represented using conjunctive or
disjunctive regular expressions.  For example, a file that is dual licensed
under either the GPL-2.0 or MIT would be represented using the following
disjunctive expression: (GPL-2.0 *or* MIT).

So my question is whether a dual license can be registered with spdx or is
it necessary to split the dual license and show the "or" condition above.
In other words, is the "or" parsing critical to license clearing reports?

Thanks.

[U-Boot] SPDX-License-Identifier on new files

[Tom Rini]

On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 11:07:58AM -0700, D Rambo wrote:

> Is there a policy that new source files upstreamed to u-boot contain
> registered SPDX license identifiers? I see that there are still about 1900
> source files that have no SPDX identifier, and about 6000 that do. The
> reason I'm asking is that our company has a dual license (for GPL2.0 or
> Proprietary), and would like to know if it is possible to submit code that
> has the legacy dual license first (and register/clean up SPDX later), or if
> we need to do the internal legal and register the appropriate licenses with
> spdx.org first before submission upstream?

New code needs to use SPDX tags.

Next, I'm not a lawyer but you should ask the legal folks in your
company if you can't just license a copy of the code in question you
want to use as reference as GPL-2.0

-- 
Tom
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20131011/c040ff9a/attachment.pgp>

[U-Boot] SPDX-License-Identifier on new files

[Wolfgang Denk]

Dear D Rambo,

In message <CAOg16C+xNXgjXQZdhXurUfOSzhWb6VSSuy=5ch3YdOfdkCJuOA@mail.gmail.com> you wrote:
>
> Is there a policy that new source files upstreamed to u-boot contain
> registered SPDX license identifiers? I see that there are still about 1900
> source files that have no SPDX identifier, and about 6000 that do. The

This is still work in progress...

> reason I'm asking is that our company has a dual license (for GPL2.0 or
> Proprietary), and would like to know if it is possible to submit code that

Please note that new code added to U-Boot shall have GPL2.0+, i. e.
GPL2.0 only is only accepted if the code is borrowed from other,
already existing projects (like the linux kernel).

>        *How does one represent a file or package that is dual licensed
> (i.e., a license choice)?*

See [1]

[1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/171426

> So my question is whether a dual license can be registered with spdx or is
> it necessary to split the dual license and show the "or" condition above.
> In other words, is the "or" parsing critical to license clearing reports?

There are two parts here;  first, you must define the exact license
terms.  GPL is already defined in SPDX, so that is no isse.  But you
have to add your proprietary license to the Licenses/ directory, and
define a Unique License Identifier for it (which you should also
submit to the SPDX project for official registration).  Second, in the
SPDX-License-Identifier: line, both license IDs get listed, separated
by white space.

Best regards,

Wolfgang Denk

-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de
Real computer scientists despise the idea of actual  hardware.  Hard-
ware has limitations, software doesn't. It's a real shame that Turing
machines are so poor at I/O.