From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S966730AbdKQWi6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Nov 2017 17:38:58 -0500 Received: from ms.lwn.net ([45.79.88.28]:48848 "EHLO ms.lwn.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965526AbdKQWit (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Nov 2017 17:38:49 -0500 Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 15:38:47 -0700 From: Jonathan Corbet To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: LKML , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton , Kate Stewart , Philippe Ombredanne , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Christoph Hellwig , Russell King , Rob Herring , Jonas Oberg , Joe Perches , linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org, Charlemagne Lasse , Carmen Bianca Bakker Subject: Re: [patch V3 01/11] Documentation: Add license-rules.rst to describe how to properly identify file licenses Message-ID: <20171117153847.251e578d@lwn.net> In-Reply-To: References: <20171116183306.103584007@linutronix.de> <20171116184358.398030394@linutronix.de> <20171116135730.265a8323@lwn.net> Organization: LWN.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 17 Nov 2017 10:48:57 +0100 (CET) Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > +The following describes the license of the Linux kernel source code > > > +(GPLv2), how to properly mark the license of individual files in the source > > > +tree, as well as links to the full license text. > > > + > > > +.. toctree:: > > > + :maxdepth: 2 > > > + > > > + process/license-rules.rst > > > + > > > > I'll confess that I'm not convinced that information on license identifiers > > is the very first thing readers should encounter when entering the kernel's > > documentation. But I'll not quibble about it for now, we can always move > > it later :) > > Any suggestions for a better place? I'd put it into Documentation/process/index.rst. That is where we have put the rest of that kind of information - stuff that people who want to do kernel development need to know. Other than that quibble, V4 looks good to me; toss in a Reviewed-by: Jonathan Corbet if you like. Thanks, jon