Re: [PATCH V2] license-rules.rst and LICENSES: Use only spdx version 3 with -only and -or-later

From: Greg Kroah-Hartman
Date: Wed Aug 22 2018 - 15:46:22 EST

On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 09:17:42PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2018, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 11:01 AM Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > How likely is it that this is applied at rc1?
> >
> > I'm staying out of the crazy license name bikeshedding, so it's going
> > to be up to the people who have decided they care.
> >
> > I think whoever *did* care and argued for the change to the SPDX
> > format is a hopeless wanker. "GPL-2.0{-only,-or-later}" is in no ways
> > better than the "GPL-2.0{,+}" that was in an earlier version of the
> > SPDX spec
> >
> > So I want nothing at all to do with pointless patches. Life is too
> > short to deal with this.
> >
> > Other people disagree, so I expect I will get these kinds of stupid
> > noise patches through the usual channels.
> I'm not a great fan of that change either. We have settled on a well
> documented and machine readable format. External tools have to be able to
> deal with SPDX versions anyway and if we do this now, then we have the next
> round of pointless churn in a year when the SPDX folks decide to rename yet
> another license identifier which is used in the kernel.

I too agree with Thomas, the SPDX change was crazy, what we have now is
fine and we should stick with it.


greg k-h