Re: [patch 2/7] LICENSES: Add the GPL 2.0 license

[Thomas Gleixner]

Jonas,

On Thu, 16 Nov 2017, Jonas Oberg wrote:

> Hi Thomas,
> 
> I do appreciate your work on this, it's a welcome addition!
> 
> > +SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0  // GPLv2 only
> > +SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ // GPLv2 or later
> 
> I am concerned about this though, as the SPDX-License-Identifier is well
> known to refer to the license of the document in which it appears, and
> it would be beneficial to avoid a situation where a tool reading this
> make the assumption the license text itself it under a particular
> license. Essentially, let's avoid overloading if we can.

Makes sense

> >From my reading, there are two intentions with the above reading:
> 
>  1) To give usage guidelines and signal that for any source file, adding
> this exact line would be a valid license identifier, and
>  2) To make the license identifiers computer understandable such that
> tools can be updated to validate whether source code includes a
> license identifier which corresponds to one of the licenses in
> LICENSES/
> 
> I'd propose to not try to do both at the same time and would propose
> a 'Valid-License-Identifier' tag to meet your second criteria, and
> a 'Usage-Guidance' tag to meet your first one. The header would then
> be:
> 
> Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
> Usage-Guidance:
>  To use this license in source code, you can use either of the following tags
>  and values:
>  .
>  SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0   // For GPLv2 only
>  SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+  // For GPLv2 or any later version

I can live with that.

Thanks for looking over this!

   tglx

Re: [patch 2/7] LICENSES: Add the GPL 2.0 license

[Thomas Gleixner]

Jonas,

On Thu, 16 Nov 2017, Jonas Oberg wrote:

> Hi Thomas,
> 
> I do appreciate your work on this, it's a welcome addition!
> 
> > +SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0  // GPLv2 only
> > +SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ // GPLv2 or later
> 
> I am concerned about this though, as the SPDX-License-Identifier is well
> known to refer to the license of the document in which it appears, and
> it would be beneficial to avoid a situation where a tool reading this
> make the assumption the license text itself it under a particular
> license. Essentially, let's avoid overloading if we can.

Makes sense

> >From my reading, there are two intentions with the above reading:
> 
>  1) To give usage guidelines and signal that for any source file, adding
> this exact line would be a valid license identifier, and
>  2) To make the license identifiers computer understandable such that
> tools can be updated to validate whether source code includes a
> license identifier which corresponds to one of the licenses in
> LICENSES/
> 
> I'd propose to not try to do both at the same time and would propose
> a 'Valid-License-Identifier' tag to meet your second criteria, and
> a 'Usage-Guidance' tag to meet your first one. The header would then
> be:
> 
> Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
> Usage-Guidance:
>  To use this license in source code, you can use either of the following tags
>  and values:
>  .
>  SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0   // For GPLv2 only
>  SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+  // For GPLv2 or any later version

I can live with that.

Thanks for looking over this!

   tglx

Re: [patch 2/7] LICENSES: Add the GPL 2.0 license

[Jonas Oberg]

Hi Thomas,

I do appreciate your work on this, it's a welcome addition!

> +SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0  // GPLv2 only
> +SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ // GPLv2 or later

I am concerned about this though, as the SPDX-License-Identifier is well
known to refer to the license of the document in which it appears, and
it would be beneficial to avoid a situation where a tool reading this
make the assumption the license text itself it under a particular
license. Essentially, let's avoid overloading if we can.

>From my reading, there are two intentions with the above reading:

 1) To give usage guidelines and signal that for any source file, adding
this exact line would be a valid license identifier, and
 2) To make the license identifiers computer understandable such that
tools can be updated to validate whether source code includes a
license identifier which corresponds to one of the licenses in
LICENSES/

I'd propose to not try to do both at the same time and would propose
a 'Valid-License-Identifier' tag to meet your second criteria, and
a 'Usage-Guidance' tag to meet your first one. The header would then
be:

Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
Usage-Guidance:
 To use this license in source code, you can use either of the following tags
 and values:
 .
 SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0   // For GPLv2 only
 SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+  // For GPLv2 or any later version


Best,

-- 
Jonas Öberg
Executive Director

FSFE e.V. - keeping the power of technology in your hands. Your
support enables our work, please join us today http://fsfe.org/join

Re: [patch 2/7] LICENSES: Add the GPL 2.0 license

[Jonas Oberg]

Hi Thomas,

I do appreciate your work on this, it's a welcome addition!

> +SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0  // GPLv2 only
> +SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ // GPLv2 or later

I am concerned about this though, as the SPDX-License-Identifier is well
known to refer to the license of the document in which it appears, and
it would be beneficial to avoid a situation where a tool reading this
make the assumption the license text itself it under a particular
license. Essentially, let's avoid overloading if we can.

>From my reading, there are two intentions with the above reading:

 1) To give usage guidelines and signal that for any source file, adding
this exact line would be a valid license identifier, and
 2) To make the license identifiers computer understandable such that
tools can be updated to validate whether source code includes a
license identifier which corresponds to one of the licenses in
LICENSES/

I'd propose to not try to do both at the same time and would propose
a 'Valid-License-Identifier' tag to meet your second criteria, and
a 'Usage-Guidance' tag to meet your first one. The header would then
be:

Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
Valid-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
Usage-Guidance:
 To use this license in source code, you can use either of the following tags
 and values:
 .
 SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0   // For GPLv2 only
 SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+  // For GPLv2 or any later version


Best,

-- 
Jonas Öberg
Executive Director

FSFE e.V. - keeping the power of technology in your hands. Your
support enables our work, please join us today http://fsfe.org/join

Re: [patch 2/7] LICENSES: Add the GPL 2.0 license

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 12:02:48PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Thomas Gleixner  wrote:
> > Add the full text of the GPL 2.0 license to the kernel tree.  It was
> > copied directly from:
> >
> >https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-2.0.html#licenseText
> >
> > Add the required tags for reference and tooling.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner 
> > Reviewed-by: Greg KH 
> > Reviewed-by: Kate Stewart 
> > Reviewed-by: Philippe Ombredanne 
> >
> > ---
> >  LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0 |  342 
> > +
> >  1 file changed, 342 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 LICENSES/GPL-2.0
> 
> Do we need 2 copies? Here and in COPYING?

Let's worry about moving the COPYING one _after_ this patch series gets
merged :)

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [patch 2/7] LICENSES: Add the GPL 2.0 license

[Greg Kroah-Hartman]

On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 12:02:48PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Thomas Gleixner  wrote:
> > Add the full text of the GPL 2.0 license to the kernel tree.  It was
> > copied directly from:
> >
> >https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-2.0.html#licenseText
> >
> > Add the required tags for reference and tooling.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner 
> > Reviewed-by: Greg KH 
> > Reviewed-by: Kate Stewart 
> > Reviewed-by: Philippe Ombredanne 
> >
> > ---
> >  LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0 |  342 
> > +
> >  1 file changed, 342 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 LICENSES/GPL-2.0
> 
> Do we need 2 copies? Here and in COPYING?

Let's worry about moving the COPYING one _after_ this patch series gets
merged :)

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: [patch 2/7] LICENSES: Add the GPL 2.0 license

[Rob Herring]

On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Thomas Gleixner  wrote:
> Add the full text of the GPL 2.0 license to the kernel tree.  It was
> copied directly from:
>
>https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-2.0.html#licenseText
>
> Add the required tags for reference and tooling.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner 
> Reviewed-by: Greg KH 
> Reviewed-by: Kate Stewart 
> Reviewed-by: Philippe Ombredanne 
>
> ---
>  LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0 |  342 
> +
>  1 file changed, 342 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 LICENSES/GPL-2.0

Do we need 2 copies? Here and in COPYING?

Rob

Re: [patch 2/7] LICENSES: Add the GPL 2.0 license

[Rob Herring]

On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 1:18 PM, Thomas Gleixner  wrote:
> Add the full text of the GPL 2.0 license to the kernel tree.  It was
> copied directly from:
>
>https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-2.0.html#licenseText
>
> Add the required tags for reference and tooling.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner 
> Reviewed-by: Greg KH 
> Reviewed-by: Kate Stewart 
> Reviewed-by: Philippe Ombredanne 
>
> ---
>  LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0 |  342 
> +
>  1 file changed, 342 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 LICENSES/GPL-2.0

Do we need 2 copies? Here and in COPYING?

Rob

[patch 2/7] LICENSES: Add the GPL 2.0 license

[Thomas Gleixner]

Add the full text of the GPL 2.0 license to the kernel tree.  It was
copied directly from:

   https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-2.0.html#licenseText

Add the required tags for reference and tooling.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner 
Reviewed-by: Greg KH 
Reviewed-by: Kate Stewart 
Reviewed-by: Philippe Ombredanne 

---
 LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0 |  342 +
 1 file changed, 342 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 LICENSES/GPL-2.0

--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0
@@ -0,0 +1,342 @@
+SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0  // GPLv2 only
+SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ // GPLv2 or later
+LICENSE-URL: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-standalone.html
+LICENSE-URL: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/GPL-2.0
+SPDX-URL: https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-2.0.html
+
+
+GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
+Version 2, June 1991
+
+Copyright (C) 1989, 1991 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA
+
+Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
+of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.
+
+Preamble
+
+The licenses for most software are designed to take away your freedom to
+share and change it. By contrast, the GNU General Public License is
+intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change free software--to
+make sure the software is free for all its users. This General Public
+License applies to most of the Free Software Foundation's software and to
+any other program whose authors commit to using it. (Some other Free
+Software Foundation software is covered by the GNU Library General Public
+License instead.) You can apply it to your programs, too.
+
+When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. Our
+General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom
+to distribute copies of free software (and charge for this service if you
+wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you want it, that you
+can change the software or use pieces of it in new free programs; and that
+you know you can do these things.
+
+To protect your rights, we need to make restrictions that forbid anyone to
+deny you these rights or to ask you to surrender the rights. These
+restrictions translate to certain responsibilities for you if you
+distribute copies of the software, or if you modify it.
+
+For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or
+for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have. You
+must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code. And you
+must show them these terms so they know their rights.
+
+We protect your rights with two steps: (1) copyright the software, and (2)
+offer you this license which gives you legal permission to copy, distribute
+and/or modify the software.
+
+Also, for each author's protection and ours, we want to make certain that
+everyone understands that there is no warranty for this free software. If
+the software is modified by someone else and passed on, we want its
+recipients to know that what they have is not the original, so that any
+problems introduced by others will not reflect on the original authors'
+reputations.
+
+Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software patents. We
+wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free program will
+individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the program
+proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any patent must be
+licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all.
+
+The precise terms and conditions for copying, distribution and modification 
follow.
+
+TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION
+
+0. This License applies to any program or other work which contains a
+   notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed under
+   the terms of this General Public License. The "Program", below, refers
+   to any such program or work, and a "work based on the Program" means
+   either the Program or any derivative work under copyright law: that is
+   to say, a work containing the Program or a portion of it, either
+   verbatim or with modifications and/or translated into another
+   language. (Hereinafter, translation is included without limitation in
+   the term "modification".)  Each licensee is addressed as "you".
+
+   Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not
+   covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running
+   the Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program is
+   covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the Program
+   (independent of having been made by running the Program). Whether that
+   is true depends on what the Program does.
+
+1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's source code
+   as you 

[patch 2/7] LICENSES: Add the GPL 2.0 license

[Thomas Gleixner]

Add the full text of the GPL 2.0 license to the kernel tree.  It was
copied directly from:

   https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-2.0.html#licenseText

Add the required tags for reference and tooling.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner 
Reviewed-by: Greg KH 
Reviewed-by: Kate Stewart 
Reviewed-by: Philippe Ombredanne 

---
 LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0 |  342 +
 1 file changed, 342 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 LICENSES/GPL-2.0

--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0
@@ -0,0 +1,342 @@
+SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0  // GPLv2 only
+SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ // GPLv2 or later
+LICENSE-URL: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/gpl-2.0-standalone.html
+LICENSE-URL: http://www.opensource.org/licenses/GPL-2.0
+SPDX-URL: https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-2.0.html
+
+
+GNU GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
+Version 2, June 1991
+
+Copyright (C) 1989, 1991 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
+51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA 02110-1301 USA
+
+Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies
+of this license document, but changing it is not allowed.
+
+Preamble
+
+The licenses for most software are designed to take away your freedom to
+share and change it. By contrast, the GNU General Public License is
+intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change free software--to
+make sure the software is free for all its users. This General Public
+License applies to most of the Free Software Foundation's software and to
+any other program whose authors commit to using it. (Some other Free
+Software Foundation software is covered by the GNU Library General Public
+License instead.) You can apply it to your programs, too.
+
+When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. Our
+General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom
+to distribute copies of free software (and charge for this service if you
+wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you want it, that you
+can change the software or use pieces of it in new free programs; and that
+you know you can do these things.
+
+To protect your rights, we need to make restrictions that forbid anyone to
+deny you these rights or to ask you to surrender the rights. These
+restrictions translate to certain responsibilities for you if you
+distribute copies of the software, or if you modify it.
+
+For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or
+for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have. You
+must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code. And you
+must show them these terms so they know their rights.
+
+We protect your rights with two steps: (1) copyright the software, and (2)
+offer you this license which gives you legal permission to copy, distribute
+and/or modify the software.
+
+Also, for each author's protection and ours, we want to make certain that
+everyone understands that there is no warranty for this free software. If
+the software is modified by someone else and passed on, we want its
+recipients to know that what they have is not the original, so that any
+problems introduced by others will not reflect on the original authors'
+reputations.
+
+Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software patents. We
+wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free program will
+individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the program
+proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any patent must be
+licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all.
+
+The precise terms and conditions for copying, distribution and modification 
follow.
+
+TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR COPYING, DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION
+
+0. This License applies to any program or other work which contains a
+   notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed under
+   the terms of this General Public License. The "Program", below, refers
+   to any such program or work, and a "work based on the Program" means
+   either the Program or any derivative work under copyright law: that is
+   to say, a work containing the Program or a portion of it, either
+   verbatim or with modifications and/or translated into another
+   language. (Hereinafter, translation is included without limitation in
+   the term "modification".)  Each licensee is addressed as "you".
+
+   Activities other than copying, distribution and modification are not
+   covered by this License; they are outside its scope. The act of running
+   the Program is not restricted, and the output from the Program is
+   covered only if its contents constitute a work based on the Program
+   (independent of having been made by running the Program). Whether that
+   is true depends on what the Program does.
+
+1. You may copy and distribute verbatim copies of the Program's source code
+   as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and
+   appropriately publish on each copy