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=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,USER_AGENT_MUTT 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 0346FC282CE for ; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 09:17:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD5C02397B for ; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 09:16:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1559639819; bh=CKO60WhmJGSut8BVML1tBrHj1dbnsf9lZJRytrIT7Fc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=fbnmHUF3re7d3sbahJ6+DELuG0Oua4aGHdoj5dNQMmEkPolgqLfsK0IBMmptAXHDM 523tDOkMNl5TzNSH+C/0AJQwZVk8V+gkd89+FjeQwjOSCreukoxMbHQ7IF1r3mppNa jPOaNx3hrmv3dgCv8PbGboEBTUrUD9VcL1R8SpLg= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726961AbfFDJQ7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jun 2019 05:16:59 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:49400 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726948AbfFDJQ7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jun 2019 05:16:59 -0400 Received: from localhost (83-86-89-107.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.86.89.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 56F8A22CF8; Tue, 4 Jun 2019 09:16:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1559639818; bh=CKO60WhmJGSut8BVML1tBrHj1dbnsf9lZJRytrIT7Fc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=SrHLjiG6e5xpw9jzoeN+rqW8w7V99wasV1G4aOmQqDp3YAKrp2V4WZdco1H/cT1/q 0r7ulpuQth1rL57XhPI2+CaQw/StPQM81o8tGhW+jFhAOYS6hYd2gVYFXhdlaHSU8Y Nto1fPKqIl/626N3rNfDkNK1AfPhKwp6H8TNdKao= Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 11:16:56 +0200 From: Greg KH To: "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" Cc: Allison Randal , "Zavras, Alexios" , "linux-spdx@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [Batch 16 patch 16/25] treewide: Replace GPLv2 boilerplate/reference with SPDX - rule 241 Message-ID: <20190604091656.GA27975@kroah.com> References: <20190602204441.312079455@linutronix.de> <20190602204654.454513226@linutronix.de> <27E3B830FA35C7429A77DAEEDEB734477E3FEB98@irsmsx105.ger.corp.intel.com> <20190603180500.GC19359@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.0 (2019-05-25) Sender: linux-spdx-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-spdx@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 09:14:38AM +0000, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > On 03.06.19 18:28, Allison Randal wrote: > > > The pattern of an unversioned GPL with a reference to COPYING was under > > discussion in item (3) of the thread "clarification on -only and > > -or-later". We didn't reach a final conclusion on whether the > > unversioned GPL (GPL-1.0-or-later) or COPYING (GPL-2.0-only) should > > dominate, so we've been holding these for later review. > > Is unversioned GPL (whatever that *really* supposed to mean :o) a > valid license here ? (or could it become one for old code ?) See the archives for details about this if you are curious. > In that case, could we just state that in the spdx header and leave > it aside, until somebody *really* needs to know it exactly ? No.