Re: [PATCH 2/3] xen/ppc: Implement early serial printk on PaPR/pseries

[Julien Grall <julien@xen.org>]

Hi Andrew,

On 09/06/2023 10:43, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 09/06/2023 10:38 am, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 09.06.2023 11:29, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 09/06/2023 10:22 am, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/ppc/boot_of.c
>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,122 @@
>>>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later */
>>>> By default we mean to use ...
>>>>
>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/ppc/early_printk.c
>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@
>>>>> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
>>>> ... the more modern form of this (GPL-2.0-only). Anything deviating from
>>>> that may want justifying in the description.
>>> GPL-2.0-or-later is fine.
>> Hmm, I was merely following
>> https://lists.xen.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2023-06/msg00415.html.
>> The text at the top of ./COPYING looks to suggest -only, and I'm
>> unaware of any other place where our default is actually written down.
> 
> The license is chosen by the submitter/copyright holder, based on their
> preferences/wishes.
> 
> It's fine for Xen to say "if you've got no vested interest, we recommend
> GPL-2.0-only", but that is strictly a recommendation and no more.
> 
> If the submitter chooses GPL-2.0-or-later, that is their prerogative.
> We have plenty of GPL-2.0-or-later code in Xen.

 From my past experience, the submitters tend to just copy the license 
from an existing file in Xen rather than explicitly choosing it. So I 
think it is fair to ask the question because our original and default 
license is GPLv2 nor GPLv2+.

Cheers,

-- 
Julien Grall