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=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 3A226C282CE for ; Wed, 22 May 2019 13:53:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0389F208C3 for ; Wed, 22 May 2019 13:53:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="I3Q6UGxT"; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=lohutok.net header.i=@lohutok.net header.b="mWyYXFh9" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728881AbfEVNxw (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 May 2019 09:53:52 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:60179 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726770AbfEVNxw (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 May 2019 09:53:52 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49E0615D0CB; Wed, 22 May 2019 09:53:49 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=subject:to:cc :references:from:message-id:date:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=XjTi2tuhP1rL oVP7s4lEpMVt0KI=; b=I3Q6UGxTzNNlGNC2zskdIVCjGdB+a7j4VnEpxaYMZfWq YSBOObtOCxgwTMDWqoSc5+ZufgSOmOr6Z6cO0KFMcS+3SwOBbgWT5qHMk2EWdG4A OQrHmbVNMN2Tq+svrjSPoQe9yw/9xqWnjHr1AujGH4RBVUm0ui1G49T+LSpfxWY= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41ACF15D0CA; Wed, 22 May 2019 09:53:49 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=lohutok.net; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=2018-11.pbsmtp; bh=+iqnrVytZE3/afS197IyplfhDC4xPXQOdOmdT2jvU8w=; b=mWyYXFh9EraDJwNzR7sfxEpkwaHX2vlHwymKs23qFh/AJN8SaYDsWw26gP/NIxvcvo63DosO6ccWI/eHyCwBMTO/3NVPb4Eoj2rIcIJg4LZDNL7cB8ZUdPTf3BEumyW/KeKgZzvUQSZgyOqxojNeOjPAGPdg7fO2zv2KIowfmiU= Received: from [192.168.1.186] (unknown [73.126.2.154]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9EBA015D0C9; Wed, 22 May 2019 09:53:48 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: clarification on -only and -or-later To: Greg KH , J Lovejoy Cc: linux-spdx@vger.kernel.org References: <13E71306-C67C-418B-AB71-2C926B3EA58E@jilayne.com> <20190521172435.aez323uuvjcghejd@ebb.org> <595412F8-2FA4-4898-8B98-0251D493CBDA@jilayne.com> <20190522132347.GC28920@kroah.com> From: Allison Randal Message-ID: <350495e0-12cb-ff16-69bd-94edf50db133@lohutok.net> Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 09:53:48 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190522132347.GC28920@kroah.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 063A295E-7C99-11E9-946C-E828E74BB12D-44123303!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: linux-spdx-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-spdx@vger.kernel.org On 5/22/19 2:23 PM, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 12:05:37PM -0600, J Lovejoy wrote: >> >> I think what I was looking for here, was confirmation as to whether we >> want to do the =E2=80=9Cliteral=E2=80=9D GPL-1.0-or-later option that = the license >> provides for, or trigger the option to =E2=80=9Cchoose any version=E2=80= =9D and go >> with GPL-2.0-or-later for consistency of v2 across the kernel and for >> other reasons I believe you raised regarding GPL-1.0 >=20 > I don't understand. Can you point to any files in the kernel where we > have used the "GPL-1.0+" marking incorrectly? Jilayne's question wasn't about current usage in the kernel, it was about what we should do in this cleanup process when we get to files where the license notice doesn't have an explicit GPL version number or include the "or later" text. Thomas hasn't gotten to those patterns yet in his batch processing. Allison