From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] can: rcar: use SPDX identifier for Renesas drivers
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2018 21:36:03 +0200
Message-ID: <20180822193603.e27diao5nhuiarv6@katana>
References: <20180821220233.9202-1-wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
 <20180821220233.9202-6-wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
 <CAOMZO5AkVNiYMGdED9erL=YMaKcmtS5BzZxw2gO1KLXEaPnD7A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180822063005.535lytz7hl32rsha@katana>
 <CAOMZO5BiAyDMSR=2Y-4-1ftNuVtRS59sSJd_cdFmzX=0kgF0Bw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOFm3uF9_rbELx0aYLDXpDnZfi2Z11V1Z4Ktw+DDJT62o2S1kQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180822193133.GA1613@kroah.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="cuvtzae5euf5uwje"
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180822193133.GA1613@kroah.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@nexb.com>, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>, Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>, Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>, Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@gmail.com>, Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@grandegger.com>, Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, linux-can@vger.kernel.org, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
List-Id: linux-can.vger.kernel.org


--cuvtzae5euf5uwje
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


> > IMHO we should always treat and use the
> > Documentation/process/license-rules.rst as the reference and not SPDX
> > proper who moves at its own pace and evolves its specs and license ids
> > independently of where we stand in the kernel.
> > If this is not right Doc patches are welcomed!
> > In this is very specific case this has been discussed on list a few
> > times. If I recall correctly Thomas also had an opinion on this...
> > So you are correct and this should be for now:
> > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
>=20
> That is correct, stick with that format/version for now please.

OK, will fix.


--cuvtzae5euf5uwje
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=IaDB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--cuvtzae5euf5uwje--