FYI:
In case you missed it: SPDX identifiers have landed in kernel land...
Read the whole thread at https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10016189/
And as a side effect, some new patches elsewhere are coming in with
SPDX identifiers right in!
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 10:38 AM
Subject: [PATCH] USB: add SPDX identifiers to all files in drivers/usb/
To: linux-usb@...
Cc: linux-kernel@..., Thomas Gleixner
<tglx@...>, Kate Stewart <kstewart@...>,
Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...>

It's good to have SPDX identifiers in all files to make it easier to
audit the kernel tree for correct licenses. This patch adds these
identifiers to all files in drivers/usb/ based on a script and data from
Thomas Gleixner, Philippe Ombredanne, and Kate Stewart.

Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...>
Cc: Kate Stewart <kstewart@...>
Cc: Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...>
---
Unless someone really complains, I'm going to add this to my tree for
4.15-rc1.


diff --git a/drivers/usb/Makefile b/drivers/usb/Makefile
index 9650b351c26c..cb8d902b801d 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/usb/Makefile
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
#
# Makefile for the kernel USB device drivers.
#
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0

# Object files in subdirectories

[....] long diff of 600 files removed for brevity...

Hi,

great to see this direction of development.
This will are least clarify all the files which carry nothing expect the Marko
MODUL_LICENSE("GPL");
Because one of the interesting questions is "is this a legally binding expression of licensing?"

Ciao
Oliver

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: spdx-bounces@... [mailto:spdx-bounces@...] Im Auftrag von Philippe Ombredanne
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 19. Oktober 2017 20:28
An: SPDX-legal; spdx-tech@...; SPDX-general
Betreff: Fwd: [PATCH] USB: add SPDX identifiers to all files in drivers/usb/

FYI:
In case you missed it: SPDX identifiers have landed in kernel land...
Read the whole thread at https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10016189/
And as a side effect, some new patches elsewhere are coming in with SPDX identifiers right in!
--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...>
Date: Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 10:38 AM
Subject: [PATCH] USB: add SPDX identifiers to all files in drivers/usb/
To: linux-usb@...
Cc: linux-kernel@..., Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...>, Kate Stewart <kstewart@...>, Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...>

It's good to have SPDX identifiers in all files to make it easier to audit the kernel tree for correct licenses. This patch adds these identifiers to all files in drivers/usb/ based on a script and data from Thomas Gleixner, Philippe Ombredanne, and Kate Stewart.

Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...>
Cc: Kate Stewart <kstewart@...>
Cc: Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...>
---
Unless someone really complains, I'm going to add this to my tree for 4.15-rc1.


diff --git a/drivers/usb/Makefile b/drivers/usb/Makefile index 9650b351c26c..cb8d902b801d 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/usb/Makefile
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
#
# Makefile for the kernel USB device drivers.
#
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0

# Object files in subdirectories

[....] long diff of 600 files removed for brevity...
_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx

On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Fendt, Oliver <oliver.fendt@...> wrote:

great to see this direction of development.
This will are least clarify all the files which carry nothing expect the Marko
MODUL_LICENSE("GPL");
Because one of the interesting questions is "is this a legally binding expression
of licensing?"

The MODULE_LICENSE macro used in the kernel is a clear license statement.
And better than a terse "Copyright (c) John Doe, GPL" that is seen in
the kernel
since there is a clear documentation of its meaning in the kernel's
module.h [0] :

* The following license idents are currently accepted as indicating free
* software modules
*
* "GPL" [GNU Public License v2 or later]
* "GPL v2" [GNU Public License v2]
* "GPL and additional rights" [GNU Public License v2 rights and more]
* "Dual BSD/GPL" [GNU Public License v2
* or BSD license choice]
* "Dual MIT/GPL" [GNU Public License v2
* or MIT license choice]
* "Dual MPL/GPL" [GNU Public License v2
* or Mozilla license choice]
*
* The following other idents are available
*
* "Proprietary" [Non free products]
[...]

So MODULE_LICENSE("GPL") means clearly "GNU Public License v2 or later"
and nothing else. I cannot comment on whether such a license statement would
be legally binding or not, but at least there is no ambiguity about
what this means.
And IMHO this is as good as an SPDX license identifier and as good as it gets
short of any other licensing indications.

Since the MODULE_LICENSE is only for kernel modules, there was a need
for something that could be applied elsewhere, hence the use of SPDX
identifiers. Note that there were talks to use a macro instead of a comment.
It may come back in the future as it would have the added benefit to inject
license ids in the built binaries (the same way a MODULE_LICENSE ends
up in a built LKM)

[0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/include/linux/module.h?id=refs/tags/v4.10#n172

--
Cordially
Philippe Ombredanne