On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 12:52:21PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > On Thu, 2020-06-25 at 22:35 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 10:33 PM Andy Shevchenko > > <andy.shevche...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 10:29 PM Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 2020-06-25 at 22:06 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 9:25 PM Enric Balletbo i Serra > > > > > <enric.balle...@collabora.com> wrote: > > > > > > Remove the ambiguity with GPL-2.0 and use an explicit GPL-2.0-only > > > > > > tag. > > > > > > > > > > Is there any? Last time IIRC Greg told me that in the kernel the old > > > > > and new variants are okay. > > > > > > > > If there wasn't any ambiguity, the older license > > > > style wouldn't be deprecated by SPDX.org. > > > > > > They are _not_ deprecated according to kernel documentation: > > > https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/LICENSES/preferred/GPL-2.0 > > > > > > So, fix documentation in the kernel then. > > > > That said, NAK to the patch as long as in-kernel documentation says it's > > valid. > > Maintainers and authors should get to chose whatever > license text they prefer with the assent of the licensors. > > A NAK here by you doesn't make much sense to me.
Yes, it's a private opinion from a PDx86 maintainer. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko