On Fri, 2018-02-02 at 12:27 -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > On Fri, Feb 2, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Igor Stoppa <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 02/02/18 17:40, Rob Herring wrote: > > > Add SPDX license tag check based on the rules defined in > > > > Shouldn't it also check that the license is compatible? > > > > Perhaps we shouldn't try to script legal advice.
True. I believe what was meant was that the entry was a valid SPDX License entry that already exists as a specific file in the LICENSES/ path. So that entry must be some combination of: $ git ls-files LICENSES/ | cut -f3- -d'/' | sort BSD-2-Clause BSD-3-Clause BSD-3-Clause-Clear GPL-1.0 GPL-2.0 LGPL-2.0 LGPL-2.1 Linux-syscall-note MIT MPL-1.1 >From my perspective, it'd be better if the various + uses had their own individual license files in the LICENSES/ path. Right now, there are many missing licenses that are already used by various existing SPDX-License-Identifier: entries. APACHE-2.0 BSD CDDL CDDL-1.0 ISC GPL-1.0+ GPL-2.0+ LGPL-2.1+ OpenSSL There are odd entries like: GPL-2.0-only Parentheses around AND/OR aren't consistent.
