Re: [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] Convert filter.txt to RST

[Tobin C. Harding]

On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 06:57:52AM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2018 11:46:36 +1000
> "Tobin C. Harding" <me@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > Thanks for clarifying.  My understanding is now; this is a case where
> > checkpatch is too verbose and we do not actually need to add a specific
> > license identifier to the documentation files (new or otherwise).  They
> > get an implicit GPLv2.
> 
> The objective actually is to have SPDX tags in all files in the kernel.
> That includes documentation, even though people, as always, care less
> about the docs than they do the code.
>
> As I understood it, the complaint with the tags you put in wasn't their
> existence, it was your putting GPLv2+ rather than straight GPLv2.  In the
> absence of information to the contrary, you really have to assume the
> latter, since that's the overall license for the kernel.

Righto, thanks Jon.  GPLv0 tags going in for v3


	Tobin