[Starlingx-discuss] Using short form SPDX style license headers
Has the project got any firm direction on using the full license text vs the SPDX "short identifiers" [0] for license headers? I am not proposing we change things wholesale, I am just looking to establish a direction moving forward. Any new files written would include the short identifier [1]. Any modified files could switch to SPDX identifiers when edited. At some point we could do a mass replacement, but not recommending that now. Many OpenSource projects are starting to use the one-line SPDX license identifier, including the Linux kernel project [2]. Example instead of including about 15 lines of Apache 2.0 License, the single line would be used: SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 Thoughts, flames? Sau! [0] https://spdx.org [1] https://spdx.org/licenses [2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Docu...
No objection at all to using the SPDX license identifiers. I thought we already were. :) brucej -----Original Message----- From: Saul Wold [mailto:sgw@linux.intel.com] Sent: Monday, August 6, 2018 10:38 AM To: starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Using short form SPDX style license headers Has the project got any firm direction on using the full license text vs the SPDX "short identifiers" [0] for license headers? I am not proposing we change things wholesale, I am just looking to establish a direction moving forward. Any new files written would include the short identifier [1]. Any modified files could switch to SPDX identifiers when edited. At some point we could do a mass replacement, but not recommending that now. Many OpenSource projects are starting to use the one-line SPDX license identifier, including the Linux kernel project [2]. Example instead of including about 15 lines of Apache 2.0 License, the single line would be used: SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 Thoughts, flames? Sau! [0] https://spdx.org [1] https://spdx.org/licenses [2] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Docu... _______________________________________________ Starlingx-discuss mailing list Starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss
On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 12:38 PM, Saul Wold <sgw@linux.intel.com> wrote:
Has the project got any firm direction on using the full license text vs the SPDX "short identifiers" [0] for license headers?
I am not proposing we change things wholesale, I am just looking to establish a direction moving forward. Any new files written would include the short identifier [1]. Any modified files could switch to SPDX identifiers when edited. At some point we could do a mass replacement, but not recommending that now.
We specifically did adopt the policy for this in the source cleanup before release. It was a mostly mechanical change so there may still be plenty of opportunity for straightening things up a bit. I'll spend a minute reviewing the internal wiki docs we wrote and re-organize it a bit to move to the public wiki, there's a good bit that doesn't apply any longer... dt -- Dean Troyer dtroyer@gmail.com
participants (3)
-
Dean Troyer
-
Jones, Bruce E
-
Saul Wold