From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A37CC282CE for ; Wed, 22 May 2019 17:00:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CF1E206BA for ; Wed, 22 May 2019 17:00:15 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=jilayne.com header.i=@jilayne.com header.b="ceDr0/pX" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729641AbfEVRAP (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 May 2019 13:00:15 -0400 Received: from mx2-c1.supremebox.com ([198.23.53.234]:43574 "EHLO mx1.supremebox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729003AbfEVRAP (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 May 2019 13:00:15 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=jilayne.com ; s=default; h=To:References:Message-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date: In-Reply-To:From:Subject:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID :Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe :List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=mc/XjMSZ3g7YOv5sXWJt/bvH7QSpPTvJ859xhe89nJc=; b=ceDr0/pXDCEIMoErZO4MBo/GI5 4AtjJWviCHrlhSIRBeN52XJF7rEko+chWY1HYom60uoSYnUYqaENj3FMSgiRvxh+OcZRmX7t9c+4S ZM8QQCmlRLr0dmSIO+zGA8xh+82hgMtqHVvFxELQEuFC/Di3oRAHZtVwQHv1cxgdftLo=; Received: from [67.164.173.226] (helo=[10.0.0.176]) by mx1.supremebox.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hTUb8-0007e4-06; Wed, 22 May 2019 17:00:14 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\)) Subject: Re: Meta-question on GPL compliance of this activity From: J Lovejoy In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 11:00:13 -0600 Cc: Greg KH , Richard Fontana , linux-spdx@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20190522132744.GD28920@kroah.com> <86651BE5-1F89-445C-ABDA-FDBFBF177409@jilayne.com> To: Thomas Gleixner X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.11) X-Sender-Ident-agJab5osgicCis: opensource@jilayne.com Sender: linux-spdx-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-spdx@vger.kernel.org > On May 22, 2019, at 10:52 AM, Thomas Gleixner = wrote: >>=20 >=20 > I understand that, but I saw new license variants crop up in the past = years > which clearly originated from $corp laywers as they were suddenly used = in > every new file of that $corp. So yes, there are both ways. *AHHHHHH* =20 ok, good to know. Will add this to my list of drums to bang on when = talking to other lawyers=E2=80=A6=20 >=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>=20 >> in terms of efficiency of process on this: my thinking is that we are >> bound to have files that need cleaning up (for one reason or another) = from >> the same copyright holders, as well as files that have similar = patterns of >> cleaning up. When it comes to reaching out to people to get them to = help >> clean stuff up, I think we=E2=80=99ll get a better response if we = collect similar >> things and send one (or minimal #) of correspondence, rather than one >> here, one there, etc. >=20 >> And, yes, we may not be able to get the copyright holders to help in = all >> cases where it would be ideal for a number of reasons (can=E2=80=99t = find them, >> too many people, etc) - but I think we all agree that is ideal and = the >> first point to try for the messy files. There seems to be plenty of >> low-hanging fruit to work on in the meantime and that=E2=80=99s GREAT = progress - >> so let=E2=80=99s not lose sight of that either :) >=20 > Sure. I already started to categorize the disclaimer infected files = and one > category of the first batch is bound to create headache. That's the = stuff > which came (probably) from TI via RidgeRun Ltd. and then got copied = into > random places. There are more of those. >=20 >> For whatever we can=E2=80=99t get copyright holders to clean up, we = will look at >> adding SPDX identifiers for. But it=E2=80=99s not worth doing that = first and then >> having someone clean up the >=20 > I think we really should do things in parallel. >=20 > 1) Contact the copyright holders where possible. >=20 > 2) Prepare some SPDX solution for the cases which are not going to be > resolved. See the other mail for a proposal. >=20 > That way we won't create roadblocks which prevent us to reach a clean = state > in a timely manner. If crap gets removed, great. If not, we have to = deal > with it no matter what. >=20 got it. I think we have some good ideas starting on the other thread! J.