On 10/14/19 7:36 AM, Ycn aKaJoseph wrote: > Hi, > > GPL-2.0-only was applied to script without previous Licences and > GPL-2.0-or-later to those mentioning it, however I'm wondering if I > should also add a SPDX id to the makefile ? > > Here's first attempt without identifier to the Makefile.
I don't have a preference regarding adding a SPDX identifier for the Makefile. If I don't see any comments one way or the other, I will pull the patch in, by the end of the week. thanks again for taking care of this, Alejandro > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 6:45 PM <richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org > <mailto:richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org>> wrote: > > On Fri, 2019-10-11 at 15:54 +0000, Alejandro Del Castillo wrote: > > On 10/11/19 8:51 AM, Ycn aKaJoseph wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13528 > > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13528__;!fqWJcnlTkjM!4ZugVhFkOciFucw9FbYbLCErJ647XFyLvF76MP_0Uo4F8sa51hi1GbwmPmZTisU17VqszQ$> > > > > < > > > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13528__;!fqWJcnlTkjM!8RtsWJXbDz_l063ZSVKrRMwvQ5KGdD0lk9aSjlUW9VHM2wufITJnBuIvovQxoT0yJXu-6Q$ > > > > > > > > > > I'm about to work on that bug however most of the script in opkg- > > > utils > > > dir are un-licenced and there's no hint for me to decide what SPDX > > > Identifier to add. > > > > thanks for doing this! > > > > > The doubt concerns those script : > > > makePackage > > > opkg-build > > > opkg-buildpackage > > > opkg-compare-indexes > > > opkg-diff > > > opkg-extract-file > > > opkg-graph-deps > > > opkg-list-fields > > > opkg-make-index > > > opkg-show-deps > > > opkg-unbuild > > > opkg-update-index > > > > > > What license do you want them to carry ? > > > > Looking at the commit history, opkg-graph-deps was authored by Haris > > Okanovic, and the rest by Richard Purdie (included them on the > > thread). > > > > My take on it: since opkg is licensed as GPLv2+, and the files that > > have a license in opkg-utils are GPLv2+, make sense to me to license > > the rest as GPLv2+ too. > > I didn't author these, they were imported from ipkg-utils which was > part of handhelds.org > > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://handhelds.org__;!fqWJcnlTkjM!4ZugVhFkOciFucw9FbYbLCErJ647XFyLvF76MP_0Uo4F8sa51hi1GbwmPmZTisWdWuYokA$>. > I did modify things quite a bit during the > import. > > handhelds.org > > <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://handhelds.org__;!fqWJcnlTkjM!4ZugVhFkOciFucw9FbYbLCErJ647XFyLvF76MP_0Uo4F8sa51hi1GbwmPmZTisWdWuYokA$>'s > CVS repos aren't there any more but I do have old > sources lying around locally. I have a snapshot of the CVS repo from > 20050930 and it has GPLv2 COPYING file (not 2+, just 2). > > I'd suggest we follow the original licensing of that and go with GPLv2. > > Cheers, > > Richard > > > > -- _______________________________________________ yocto mailing list yocto@yoctoproject.org https://lists.yoctoproject.org/listinfo/yocto