linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rust: macros: add `paste!` proc macro

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CANiq72nWArGsvWVVknPdAVYUbWqJKfwOAVCRUmLnuAHAHP+rSQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 10 Aug 2023 00:29:06 +0200
From:   Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>
To:     Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>
Cc:     Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
        Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
        Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@...il.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
        Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
        Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
        Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...sung.com>,
        Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rust: macros: add `paste!` proc macro

On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 12:02 AM Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net> wrote:
>
> Sorry I forgot to add license comments!

No problem at all :)

> All my kernel contributions are permissively licensed if possible, so I
> am fine with this being either MIT or GPL-2.0 (I think GPL-2.0 is
> deprecated in as a SPDX license identifier and it should be
> GPL-2.0-only going forward, though).

Yeah, the 3.0 version of the SPDX license list deprecated `GPL-2.0`,
but the kernel still allows `GPL-2.0` and lists it first. I recall
thinking about this before the initial merge, and I think I went with
the original form because the main `COPYING` file still uses that.
After that I am just keeping it consistent, though I am not sure when
the kernel will migrate.

> Given this is non-kernel specific generic code, I think it might worth
> following the convention of the paste and pin-init code and make it
> `Apache-2.0 OR MIT`? This would also make it the same license as the
> `paste` crate (although we don't have to keep the same license as this
> is a different implementation).
>
> I'll leave the final decision to you.

Since you prefer it and it makes sense that someone may want to use it
(`concat` and `expand`) elsewhere, let's go with that. I will add:

    // SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 OR MIT

then. Thanks for the very quick reply!

Cheers,
Miguel