On Wed, 10 Oct 2018, Hans de Goede wrote:
> The only reason we have the CDDL-1.0 license text around is for some
> dual-licensed files from virtualbox. New code should not use this license.
>
> Add a note about this and change the example tag to be dual-licensed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdego...@redhat.com>
> ---
> LICENSES/other/CDDL-1.0 | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/LICENSES/other/CDDL-1.0 b/LICENSES/other/CDDL-1.0
> index 195a1687930a..164401ea9e62 100644
> --- a/LICENSES/other/CDDL-1.0
> +++ b/LICENSES/other/CDDL-1.0
> @@ -1,10 +1,12 @@
> Valid-License-Identifier: CDDL-1.0
> SPDX-URL: https://spdx.org/licenses/CDDL-1.0.html
> Usage-Guide:
> + Do NOT use. The CDDL-1.0 is not GPL compatible. It may only be used for
> + dual-licensed files where the other license is GPL compatible.
> To use the Common Development and Distribution License 1.0 put the
> following SPDX tag/value pair into a comment according to the placement
> guidelines in the licensing rules documentation:
> - SPDX-License-Identifier: CDDL-1.0
> + SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0 OR CDDL-1.0)
I'd rather replace the 'GPL-2.0' with something like '$GPL-COMPATIBLE-ID'
and say explicitely in the prosa text that CCDL can only be used with OR
and not with AND.
Thanks,
tglx
