Re: [PATCH 2/2] LICENSES: Remove the use of deprecated LGPL SPDX tags

From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Cc: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>,
	Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>, Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>,
	Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>,
	Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] LICENSES: Remove the use of deprecated LGPL SPDX tags
Date: Fri, 5 May 2023 14:36:02 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <df25cf9e-cf90-030a-91eb-6ee16b7b4dc7@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ac1662eb-41de-baee-45a0-db01b2141692@suse.com>

On 05/05/2023 2:31 pm, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 05.05.2023 15:22, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 05/05/2023 2:13 pm, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 05.05.2023 15:05, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>> The SPDX forms without an explicit -only or -or-later suffix are deprecated
>>>> and should not be used.
>>> I guess this wants a reference to where this is specified. In particular ...
>>>
>>>> --- a/LICENSES/LGPL-2.1
>>>> +++ b/LICENSES/LGPL-2.1
>>>> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
>>>> -Valid-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1
>>>> -Valid-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1+
>>>> +Valid-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1-only
>>>> +Valid-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1-or-later
>>>>  
>>>>  SPDX-URL: https://spdx.org/licenses/LGPL-2.1.html
>>> ... I can't spot anything like this under e.g. this URL.
>> Hmm yeah, it is irritating.  The statement is at
>> https://spdx.org/licenses/ but only by virtue of two tables, the second
>> of which is the list of deprecated identifiers.
>>
>> I'll put a paragraph about this in the commit message.
>>
>>> Also is there a reason you add Deprecated-Identifier: only to GPL-2.0?
>>> Enumerating them would seem reasonable to me, not just for completeness,
>>> but also in case we end up importing a file with a deprecated tag.
>> We have problematic uses of GPL in tree, where we don't for LGPL.
>>
>> I'm considering a gitlab pass which will reject patches with use an
>> identifier not in the permitted list, and reject in introduction of new
>> uses of the deprecated ones.    For this, the deprecated-but-tolerated
>> tags need calling out in some machine-readable way, but I don't think
>> it's helpful to express the tolerating of a tag we don't have any
>> violations of.
> Hmm, okay. With the expanded commit message
> Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>

Thanks.  FAOD, here's the full commit message with adjustment:

LICENSES: Remove the use of deprecated LGPL SPDX tags

The SPDX forms without an explicit -only or -or-later suffix are deprecated
and should not be used.

Somewhat unhelpfully at the time of writing, this only appears to be
indicated
by the separation of the two tables at https://spdx.org/licenses/

The recent changes to libacpi are the only examples of deprecated LGPL
tags in
tree, so fix them all up.

For GPL, we have many examples using deprecated tags.  For now, just
identify
them as such and recommend that no new instances get added.

Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>