[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Minios-devel] [UNIKRAFT PATCHv4 18/43] plat/include: Define address offsets of boot stack and pagetable

On 13.07.2018 11:56, Julien Grall wrote:

On 13/07/18 08:58, Simon Kuenzer wrote:
Hi all,

Hi Simon,

Thank you for your feedback on SPDX.

On 09.07.2018 12:10, Wei Chen wrote:
diff --git a/plat/common/include/arm/arm64/cpu_defs.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b7eba93
--- /dev/null
+++ b/plat/common/include/arm/arm64/cpu_defs.h
@@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
+/* SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause */

IIRC, the goal of SPDX is to avoid to copy the full header afterwards.
Can we please do one or the other but not both?

Actually, the copyright header confused me a lot. I think I need a guide
@Simon Kuenzer (simon.kuenzer@xxxxxxxxx) : (

Hum, good question. We actually treated the SPDX header as optional addition and require you to provide at least the License text. If a file has none of both, the project license applies as fall-back. With SPDX we originally wanted to enable automated tooling that uses those headers to check for licenses compatibilities. But we did not try it yet and SPDX might be incomplete for some files. But in general I have my concerns that SPDX alone is enough for defining a license for the code (please not note that I am not a lawyer). This is the reason why we ended up with both for all files
With the full text it is fairly easy to make a mistake in the wording and not spotting it during review. To give a concrete example, we mistakenly accepted copyright with for GPLv2+ in Xen. This was not spotted until recently because there are only a couple of words difference.


So I think I would encourage contributors to use SPDX whenever it is possible.

FWIW, Linux folks seems to be happy with only SPDX tag.


Minios-devel mailing list



Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.