Spdx tags: Use PSDX tags for this project #7
Conversation
tinycompress project is licensed under LGPL 2.1 and BSD 3 Clause, so remove the license text and use SPDX tags Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <[email protected]>
Update to use SPDX tags in the C files. Ensure the Copyright and Author information is retained Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <[email protected]>
Update to use SPDX tags in the H files. Ensure the Copyright and Author information is retained Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <[email protected]>
The Makefile.am and Android.mk files do not contains any license information, add the SPDX tags in the files Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <[email protected]>
Since utils-lgpl in only licensed as LGPL-2.1, add the COPYING file mentioning this explicitly Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <[email protected]>
Use the /* ... */ style to add SDPX tags. Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <[email protected]>
The Makefile.am file do not contains any license information, add the SPDX tags in the files Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <[email protected]>
|
@plbossart @charleskeepax Please do check the Copyright/Author info is not messed up -) |
|
|
||
| tinycompress library for compress audio offload in alsa | ||
| Copyright (c) 2011-2012, Intel Corporation | ||
| All rights reserved. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@vinodkoul you cannot remove the Intel Copyright.
Copyright is a different concept to the license. It's fine to use SPDX for the license, the copyright needs to stay as is.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@plbossart If you look closely, the copyright is retained in src file where IMO it is apt. Here in COPYING file it feels a copy paste mistake, hence removal.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Some of these COPYING files only provide the license, others combine license and copyright. I don't know what the rule is and I am not a lawyer, so when in doubt I am asking you to please keep the copyright as is. It may be a mistake but that's not for me to approve.
| LGPL LICENSE | ||
|
|
||
| tinycompress library for compress audio offload in alsa | ||
| Copyright (c) 2011-2012, Intel Corporation. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
same here, please keep the copyright for Intel.
| */ | ||
| /* SPDX-License-Identifier: (LGPL-2.1-only OR BSD-3-Clause) */ | ||
| /* Copyright (c) 2011-2012, Intel Corporation */ | ||
| /* Author: Vinod Koul <[email protected]> */ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why not the kernel-style
// SPDX-License-Identifier: (LGPL-2.1-only OR BSD-3-Clause)
// Copyright (c) 2011-2012, Intel Corporation
// Vinod Koul <[email protected]
-> I don't know what the official policy is but you did this work as an Intel employee. Your email no longer reflect that fact.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I felt that we can be simpler and use two styles, /* SPDX */ for code files.
and # SPDX for Makefiles.
Let me know if there is a strong reason to keep kernel style
The email refers to author of file and that persons updated email address, has nothing to do we who I was employed with (it was actually modified after I left Intel)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't care about style, but you created your own style here. why change?
| tinycompress is provided under a dual BSD/LGPLv2.1 license. When using or | ||
| redistributing tinycompress, you may do so under either license. | ||
| tinycompress is provided under: | ||
| SPDX-License-Identifier: LGPL-2.1-only OR BSD-3-Clause |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why not use the same notation as in the rest of the files
SPDX-License-Identifier: (LGPL-2.1-only OR BSD-3-Clause)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this should, thanks for pointing
| /* Copyright (c) 2011-2012, Intel Corporation */ | ||
| /* Copyright (c) 2013-2014, Wolfson Microelectronic Ltd. */ | ||
| /* Author: Vinod Koul <[email protected]> */ | ||
| /* Author: Charles Keepax <[email protected]> */ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the C comments are really not very nice.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would like simpler notation, so this feels better than using 3 styles
There was a problem hiding this comment.
According to the kernel documentation (Documentation/process/license-rules.rst), the point of the different styles was to work round some tooling bugs regarding .lds files, which have since been fixed. So I don't think there is any issue with using a single style here, although I have no opinion on what style would be best.
|
|
||
| //Copyright (c) 2011-2012, Intel Corporation | ||
| //Copyright (c) 2018-2019, Linaro Ltd |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code style change
|
|
||
| //Copyright (c) 2011-2012, Intel Corporation |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not really confused as to whether this is indeed an Intel contribution. I don't think we added anything with LGPL-only, did we?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This was derived from cplay.c (lots of code copy) hence the original copyright was retained by me and new one added
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see. In that case, you should make it clearer. e.g.
Derived from cplay.c Copyright (c) 2011-2012, Intel Corporation
Add SPDX tags and remove the license text, Also adds SPDX tags to files which have this missing