On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 14:57 -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 1:06 PM, Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote:  > > Right now, there are many missing licenses > > that are already used by various existing > > SPDX-License-Identifier: entries. > > > > APACHE-2.0 > > Given that Apache 2.0 is not compatible with GPL 2, that would pretty > much mean anything with Apache license is dual licensed and it would > be the other license that applies. Do we really want/need license > texts for all the other possible licenses that don't apply to kernel > files?
There are 2 uses of SPDX.*Apache in staging. drivers/staging/android/ashmem.h:// SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR Apache-2.0) drivers/staging/android/uapi/ashmem.h:// SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR Apache-2.0) I believe each specific license text should be available in either the actual source file with the Apache license or in a specific LICENSES/ file in the kernel tree. > If so, > this should all just be scripted to sync LICENSES/ with > found SPDX tags in the kernel. Right. That's probably best. > ISC and OpenSSL are only in license-rules.rst as examples. We should > just fix those examples to something else. Sounds good to me. I should have excluded Documentation/process/license-rules.rst from the SPDX matches. Are significant portions of that document generic across multiple projects or is it entirely specific to linux? cheers, Joe