[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180822193603.e27diao5nhuiarv6@katana>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2018 21:36:03 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@...il.com>,
Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-can@...r.kernel.org,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] can: rcar: use SPDX identifier for Renesas drivers
> > IMHO we should always treat and use the
> > Documentation/process/license-rules.rst as the reference and not SPDX
> > proper who moves at its own pace and evolves its specs and license ids
> > independently of where we stand in the kernel.
> > If this is not right Doc patches are welcomed!
> > In this is very specific case this has been discussed on list a few
> > times. If I recall correctly Thomas also had an opinion on this...
> > So you are correct and this should be for now:
> > // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
>
> That is correct, stick with that format/version for now please.
OK, will fix.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists