On 02/02/18 21:06, Joe Perches wrote: > 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.
I expect that there is a finite number of compatible licenses. Maybe I'm too optimistic about what can be taken as legal advice or not, but I would expect that a warning about unmatched license type does not constitute legal advice. Is it too optimistic? :-D -- igor
