On Thu, 14 Jul 2022, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 10, 2022 at 10:30:05PM +0530, Ani Sinha wrote: > > Added the SPDX license identifiers based on the following output from the > > licensee tool for bios bits: > > > > $ licensee detect bits/ > > License: NOASSERTION > > Matched files: COPYING > > COPYING: > > Content hash: 7a1fdfa894728ea69588977442c92073aad69e50 > > License: NOASSERTION > > Closest non-matching licenses: > > BSD-3-Clause-Clear similarity: 85.82% > > BSD-4-Clause similarity: 83.69% > > BSD-3-Clause similarity: 77.27% > > This report looks pretty bogus to me. > > smbios.py license header pretty clearly matches BSD-3-Clause with > 99% similarity. OK in the next iteration I will fix this. This tool likely just looked at the COPYING file in bits and not the individual python files. > > https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause.html > > and is pretty different from > > https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause-Clear.html > > which adds a statement about patent rights which doens't exist. > > > If we're going to add SPDX tags to existing files it needs to be > done by a human, not an automated tool. If not possible, we should > leave off SPDX tags, because adding incorrect SPDX tags creates > more harm > > > With regards, > Daniel > -- > |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| > |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| > |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| > >