On 12/14/2017 6:28 PM, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
14/12/2017 12:33, Hemant Agrawal:
Thomas,
Before I rework,
What is your opinion w.r.t tooling in DPDK w.r.t SPDX.
I saw a patch for checkpatch in Linux, which will also check for SPDX
presence for any new file, however this patch onl
14/12/2017 12:33, Hemant Agrawal:
> Thomas,
> Before I rework,
> What is your opinion w.r.t tooling in DPDK w.r.t SPDX.
>
> I saw a patch for checkpatch in Linux, which will also check for SPDX
> presence for any new file, however this patch only checked first two
> line for SPDX pre
On 12/13/2017 10:43 AM, Hemant Agrawal wrote:
On 12/12/2017 10:27 PM, Olivier MATZ wrote:
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 09:56:40AM -0800, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
On 12/10/2017 9:27 PM, Hemant Agrawal wrote:
Hi all,
Most templates are showing copyright first and SPDX later i.e. the
typical way for wr
On 12/12/2017 10:27 PM, Olivier MATZ wrote:
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 09:56:40AM -0800, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
On 12/10/2017 9:27 PM, Hemant Agrawal wrote:
Hi all,
Most templates are showing copyright first and SPDX later i.e. the
typical way for writing the license.
However some projects h
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 09:56:40AM -0800, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 12/10/2017 9:27 PM, Hemant Agrawal wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > Most templates are showing copyright first and SPDX later i.e. the
> > typical way for writing the license.
> >
> > However some projects has followed it other way arou
On 12/10/2017 9:27 PM, Hemant Agrawal wrote:
> On 12/8/2017 11:52 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
>> On 12/08/2017 08:29 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
>>> On 12/8/2017 2:28 AM, Olivier Matz wrote:
To be compliant with the DPDK licensing guidelines, switch to
BSD-3-Clause. It can be done safely sinc
On Mon, Dec 11, 2017 at 10:57:41AM +0530, Hemant Agrawal wrote:
[...]
> > License text example in [1] starts from Copyright and has All rights
> > reserved.
> > I agree that template should be clearly specified from the very beginning.
> >
> > [1] https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause#licenseText
On 12/8/2017 11:52 PM, Andrew Rybchenko wrote:
On 12/08/2017 08:29 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
On 12/8/2017 2:28 AM, Olivier Matz wrote:
To be compliant with the DPDK licensing guidelines, switch to
BSD-3-Clause. It can be done safely since the BSD headers from which
these files derive also exist a
On 12/08/2017 08:29 PM, Ferruh Yigit wrote:
On 12/8/2017 2:28 AM, Olivier Matz wrote:
To be compliant with the DPDK licensing guidelines, switch to
BSD-3-Clause. It can be done safely since the BSD headers from which
these files derive also exist as a BSD-3-Clause license in FreeBSD.
Link:
htt
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 09:29:57 -0800
Ferruh Yigit wrote:
> On 12/8/2017 2:28 AM, Olivier Matz wrote:
> > To be compliant with the DPDK licensing guidelines, switch to
> > BSD-3-Clause. It can be done safely since the BSD headers from which
> > these files derive also exist as a BSD-3-Clause license
On 12/8/2017 2:28 AM, Olivier Matz wrote:
> To be compliant with the DPDK licensing guidelines, switch to
> BSD-3-Clause. It can be done safely since the BSD headers from which
> these files derive also exist as a BSD-3-Clause license in FreeBSD.
>
> Link:
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/free
To be compliant with the DPDK licensing guidelines, switch to
BSD-3-Clause. It can be done safely since the BSD headers from which
these files derive also exist as a BSD-3-Clause license in FreeBSD.
Link:
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/freebsd/freebsd/78a6b0861813af31e1354fa407c5701e8764b4d6/s
12 matches
Mail list logo
