Re: [PATCH for-4.18] docs: Delete kconfig docs to fix licensing violation

[Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 10 Nov 2023, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 09/11/2023 11:59 pm, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Thu, 9 Nov 2023, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 08.11.2023 15:37, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> >>> These 3 Kconfig docs were imported from Linux erroneously.  They are
> >>> GPL-2.0-only in Linux, but have no SPDX tag and were placed in such a way 
> >>> to
> >>> be included by the blanket statement saying that all RST files are 
> >>> CC-BY-4.0.
> >>>
> >>> We should not be carrying a shadow copy of these docs.  They aren't even 
> >>> wired
> >>> into our Sphinx docs, and anyone wanting to refer to Kconfig docs is 
> >>> going to
> >>> look at the Linux docs anyway.  These, and more docs can be found at:
> >>>
> >>>   https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/kbuild/
> >>>
> >>> which also have corrections vs the snapshot we took.
> >> Imo this reference ...
> >>
> >>> Fixes: f80fe2b34f08 ("xen: Update Kconfig to Linux v5.4")
> >>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> ---
> >>> CC: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> CC: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> >>> CC: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>> CC: Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>
> >>> CC: Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>
> >>> CC: Henry Wang <Henry.Wang@xxxxxxx>
> >>> ---
> >>>  docs/misc/kconfig-language.rst       | 701 ---------------------------
> >>>  docs/misc/kconfig-macro-language.rst | 247 ----------
> >>>  docs/misc/kconfig.rst                | 304 ------------
> >>>  3 files changed, 1252 deletions(-)
> >>>  delete mode 100644 docs/misc/kconfig-language.rst
> >>>  delete mode 100644 docs/misc/kconfig-macro-language.rst
> >>>  delete mode 100644 docs/misc/kconfig.rst
> >> ... wants putting into, say, the last of these three files you delete, as
> >> a replacement. I can't spot any other place where we would have such a
> >> reference.
> >>
> >> One problem I see with deleting our shadow copy is that by referring to
> >> Linux'es doc, the wrong impression may arise that whatever new features
> >> they invent we also support. Thoughts? (If nothing else, I'd expect this
> >> aspect to be mentioned / justified in the description.)
> > I think the ideal solution would be to replace the shadow copies with a
> > link to the Linux docs of a specific Linux tag (v5.4), instead of
> > generic Linux master. I am not sure where to place the links though.
> 
> I don't personally think we need to keep any other reference around. 
> They're not interesting, because they're not going to be found by anyone
> except those who already know they're there, and won't need to refer to
> them for the kind of content they provide.
> 
> Kconfig isn't a fast-moving target, and there's nothing new in Linux vs
> what we've got here.  The only interesting difference between us and
> Linux is the fact we don't use modules, and we didn't even strip that
> out of the shadow copy.
> 
> We do have xen/tools/kconfig/README.source which states where it came from.
> 
> I could be persuaded to add the following hunk.  What we have isn't
> precisely v5.4 anyway - we've got some reasonable differences in the
> makefile side of things.

The below is good enough in my opinion. Ack.


> diff --git a/xen/tools/kconfig/README.source
> b/xen/tools/kconfig/README.source
> index 44631f68e8..ac394106b9 100644
> --- a/xen/tools/kconfig/README.source
> +++ b/xen/tools/kconfig/README.source
> @@ -5,5 +5,7 @@ in this part of the Xen source tree.
>  
>  xen/tools/kconfig
>  -----------------
> -The kconfig directory was originally imported from the linux kernel
> -git tree at kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git, path: scripts/kconfig
> +The kconfig directory was originally imported from the Linux kernel
> +git tree at kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git, path: scripts/kconfig of
> +roughly v5.4.  Linux's documentation can be found at:
> +https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/kbuild/
>