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=-6.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 082FAC433EF for ; Wed, 8 Sep 2021 09:23:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D76116105A for ; Wed, 8 Sep 2021 09:23:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1351415AbhIHJYT (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2021 05:24:19 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46112 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1351419AbhIHJYR (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2021 05:24:17 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-x430.google.com (mail-wr1-x430.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::430]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A39C7C061575 for ; Wed, 8 Sep 2021 02:23:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x430.google.com with SMTP id q26so2205952wrc.7 for ; Wed, 08 Sep 2021 02:23:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=fh+F8CROR/VGjtwnArq/oSSwBfX7MOCM+iT+UjFKOsQ=; b=X5IZxsAjNhCpLNFWGkruA1U69Yz012X+5qavETg77Ely8C50Fbwdl3xt8F53herger aa/Re1P/jAim/3x6+hOio3gGmYIkCRSHIQRI/UMo/zxxSyT/siPhK2nh/FK02T0C9lQt bnrJxuKvsS90srDlAu5q0ht547E0IhQhWHsA/6ze8+fXCh6aJUrO/B8FvMNam3el+I4o myLrGsbgqRL2lHgohnA866lMpEW/6o/KiR6BJIvzLfTFtVHIKJoArJjx+82690hu4Fuf PNVHuK0YCK8pb2mWAzp3ALFLdQTI053AwqfgjWfdqJVpEgCrhYkLNTPDfdy0PknY9uuI cq+A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=fh+F8CROR/VGjtwnArq/oSSwBfX7MOCM+iT+UjFKOsQ=; b=l6lUDUAHvGX8oWK7C2/aIcM5tGcbsr4uEV5UF9eSnZy0ITRCRK/91edNU12SWYgMhV QjOni7vXfGcJ5tJW1JiSix+uKTPgMzxJSKSo3rMWrDTXxRDHrrPEoZ+8KTiFrKW4Rs7S oeDQo1jMu/KXl3+FQmRrb4DQX5BIxNwPkQutFZnhM/MG6SCRS9E9LKV4BUvcvtwrRET0 zXvoDAJIUnYHZ05fGYndXS1kv8QNp0qQiegnyfauokNQl5+HL8YFq/l77Tww7xgnZwpc q/7Fri1rDPCCsRfAgnIsMoiM0oYZ79cVrIsBQXDWAt3M9oKFLptcj6h0Ee8dfh/6DbB+ AG5w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533j+uNAgNADpd4sYfyJ9WP2FPfJCDSRjCz6UaVCc8ded4DsVo9m ZCFR2n7Q/hhC00jBJA5W5KE= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwL8+xrKJB6JaLucQg+6u6ELJSErm7zdiIAzXnjsu1o/WPc/pxVXKaguQxQVuQNLP0ehGqxDg== X-Received: by 2002:adf:eb02:: with SMTP id s2mr2937880wrn.294.1631092988271; Wed, 08 Sep 2021 02:23:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.168.10.11] ([170.253.36.171]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m12sm1532126wrq.29.2021.09.08.02.23.07 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 08 Sep 2021 02:23:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [RFC v3 1/9] LICENSES/GPL-1.0-or-later.txt, many pages: Use SPDX markings To: Richard Fontana Cc: mtk.manpages@gmail.com, linux-man@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , Jilayne Lovejoy , Alexios Zavras References: <20210905132542.245236-1-alx.manpages@gmail.com> <20210905132542.245236-2-alx.manpages@gmail.com> From: "Alejandro Colomar (man-pages)" Message-ID: <074061d6-0973-f0a7-57ca-188e85e17f22@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2021 11:23:06 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-man@vger.kernel.org Hello Richard, On 9/5/21 11:53 PM, Richard Fontana wrote: > On Sun, Sep 5, 2021 at 9:25 AM Alejandro Colomar wrote: >> >> To simplify understanding which license applies to each file, >> let's use SPDX markings, which are simple, informative, and >> commonly used in many projects. >> Let's also follow REUSE conventions. >> >> I assime GPL-1.0-or-later is the closest thing to GPL_NOVERSION_ONELINE, >> which I couldn't find anywhere. > > That's pretty unlikely what any contributor to these files intended, > but maybe harmless. But the inclusion of the GPL version 1 text (the > logic of which I understand, given the desire to follow REUSE) > emphasizes the awkwardness. If this were my project, I'd probably just > recast these as GPL-2.0-or-later (which is generally understood to be > permissible). Socially, I think by the early years of the kernel, GPL > version 1 was largely forgotten, and "the GPL" had come to mean GPL > version 2, or in some contexts GPL version 2 and (for a long time) > hypothetical future versions of the GPL. Technically, we could update 1.0+ to 2.0+, since it's a subset of it. I didn't want to reduce rights artificially before knowing what GPL_NOVERSION_ONELINE is. But if the general understanding is that authors wanted GPL 2, I'm fine with it. I'll do that in a separate commit for now (which will remove the 1.0+ license text and change the identifiers), however, instead of amending. > > One other thing: > >> -.\" Copyright 1995-2000 David Engel (david@ods.com) >> -.\" Copyright 1995 Rickard E. Faith (faith@cs.unc.edu) >> -.\" Copyright 2000 Ben Collins (bcollins@debian.org) >> -.\" Redone for GLibc 2.2 >> -.\" Copyright 2000 Jakub Jelinek (jakub@redhat.com) >> -.\" Corrected. >> -.\" and Copyright (C) 2012, 2016, Michael Kerrisk >> -.\" >> -.\" %%%LICENSE_START(GPL_NOVERSION_ONELINE) >> -.\" Do not restrict distribution. >> -.\" May be distributed under the GNU General Public License >> -.\" %%%LICENSE_END >> +.\" SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 1995-2000, David Engel >> +.\" SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 1995, Rickard E. Faith >> +.\" SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2000, Ben Collins >> +.\" SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2000, Jakub Jelinek >> +.\" SPDX-FileCopyrightText: 2012, 2016, Michael Kerrisk > > I haven't followed what the kernel has been doing around use of SPDX > expressions in source files for a long time. Is it now routinely > replacing original copyright notices with these SPDX-FileCopyrightText > statements? Without permission from the authors, this feels > questionable to me, as (in theory) this could have some sort of > unexpected legal consequence or violate the expectations of the > authors. In at least some cases, the original copyright notice might > be a formally valid copyright notice under US law (or perhaps, less > likely I think, the law of some other jurisdiction) while the > transformed version wouldn't be. To be sure, it's unlikely to matter > for various reasons, but I just hope someone has thought about this. I'm not an expert in legal matters, and also don't know very much what other projects have been doing about this. I reformatted some of the copyright lines in the following ways: - Transform () emails into <> for consistency. Not a meaningful change. - Add commas and spaces for consistency. Not a meaningful change. - Remove the "Copyright (c) " prefix, since I understand that "SPDX-FileCopyrightText: " replaces it, I hope both semantically and legally. I hope this is not a meaningful change, but I'd like advise from experts (that's why I CCd some SPDX people). - When dates were so specific to include the day, I simplified to only the year. That's slightly meaningful, maybe too much... But I thought that knowing the exact day a page was written isn't important 30 years after. - I consciously removed text in a couple copyright of lines saying "All rights reserved." when the license was GPL. It was simply wrong. The GPL is already giving away rights, so they are not reserved. > > Ah, I also see that the SPDX speaks of SPDX-FileCopyrightText : > https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/appendix-IX-file-tags/ > > But in the examples there, it looks like the hypothetical original > copyright notice is preserved and just gets "SPDX-FIleCopyrightText" > prepended. Here you're transforming the original copyright notice into > a "date, name" string. Well, it's mostly what a copyright notice was originally meant to be, I think; copyright holder and date. SPDX only formats it more consistently. Thanks, Alex -- Alejandro Colomar Linux man-pages comaintainer; https://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/