[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1711122057130.1993@nanos>
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2017 20:57:51 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...uxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Russell King <rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk>,
Rob Herring <rob.herring@...aro.org>,
Jonas Oberg <jonas@...e.org>, linux-xfs@...r.kernel.org,
Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 1/7] Documentation: Add license-rules.rst to describe
how to properly identify file licenses
On Sun, 12 Nov 2017, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sun, 2017-11-12 at 20:18 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > Add a file to the Documentation directory to describe how file licenses
> > should be described in all kernel files, using the SPDX identifier, as well
> > as where all licenses should be in the kernel source tree for people to
> > refer to (LICENSES/).
> >
> > Thanks to Kate, Philippe and Greg for review and editing!
> p[
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/license-rules.rst
> []
> > +The common way of expressing the license of a source file is to add the
> > +matching boiler plate text into the top comment of the file. Due to
> > +formatting, typos etc. These "boiler plates" are hard to validate for
> > +tools, which are used in the context of license compliance.
>
> There is bad sentence construction here and it is a
> little difficult to parse what is intended.
>
> "These" should not be capitalized.
Indeed.
> This SPDX info should also be place in the Documentation/process
> content somewhere.
Works for me.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists