[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171127101650.74f6e272.cohuck@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 10:16:50 +0100
From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Huth <thuth@...hat.com>,
Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] s390/virtio: add BSD license to virtio-ccw
On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 09:15:14 +0100
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com> wrote:
> On 11/24/2017 06:18 PM, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 07:02:41PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >> On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 05:53:01PM +0100, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> >>>>> Is there any reason to add the whole BSD 3 clause license text? I'd prefer
> >>>>> if it would be just the simple new SPDX-License-Identifier above.
> >>
> >> I added it for consistency with other virtio headers.
> >
> > Well, one of the points of the SPDX tags is to avoid the countless
> > duplication of license texts. Adding a license text is easy, removing it
> > again later is not as easy. Therefore I would prefer to avoid the
> > duplication here again.
> >
> > Cornelia, Christian, any opinion here?
>
> I would prefer to not have the full licence text and only have the SPDX string
> if that is allowed by the licence.
>
Works for me.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists