Re: [ptxdist] [PATCH 00/34] License updates

[Michael Olbrich <m.olbrich@pengutronix.de>]

Hi,

Thanks for this series. I've looked at all of the patches now and I've done
some checking that this makes sense. I've had comments for some of them.
I'm currently running build tests for the rest (this is mostly to check
that the md5sums are ok).

These should hit master soon. I hope I got all of them, but you should
probably rebase your brach once I've pushed the initial batch.

Michael

On Fri, May 10, 2019 at 11:24:00AM +0200, Alexander Dahl wrote:
> I reviewed lots of packages for licensing issues and this patch series
> is the outcome. There are basically three types of patches:
> 
> 1) Add license information where it was missing
> 2) Add license file hashes for otherwise already correct packages
> 3) Fix license information where the given licenses are/became wrong
> 4) Combinations of the above
> 
> When mistakes were traceable to specific changesets, I added Fixes:
> lines and the original author in Cc. This is not meant to offend
> anyone, but to get a second opinion or review. This legal stuff is
> hard, I get headaches from this. This is also why some commit messages
> are longer than others.
> 
> Please review these patches carefully, I'm no lawyer. Some small
> upstream projects make it easy to check each file, some would require
> to inspect over 100 source files, if you want to do it right. Almost
> none so far uses those still quite new SPDX license identifiers in the
> file headers (sudo does in a version not yet available in ptxdist).
> 
> Some patches contain additional notes with remarks or questions.
> 
> Thanks to Roland Hieber for his SPDX matching tool [1], which made all
> this a lot easier. You should however not solely depend on that tool,
> but have a look into the current SPDX license list [3] and exceptions
> [4].
> 
> Also helpful was the Debian project. They carry detailed copyright
> information with their packages (well, most of them), e.g.:
> 
> https://metadata.ftp-master.debian.org/changelogs//main/u/util-linux/util-linux_2.33.1-0.1_copyright
> 
> And I also had a look on the license information the buildroot project
> [2] has in its packages. Maybe someone wants to send them patches as
> well. ;-)
> 
> Some additional notes on which packages should be reviewed and
> probably updated:
> 
> * U-Boot
> * util-linux-ng
> 
> Let me know, if I should reorder or change or squash something, but I
> would also be happy, if just a subset would be applied.
> 
> Greets
> Alex
> 
> P.S.: For people enjoying a long read about this whole license mess,
> here you go: https://invisible-island.net/ncurses/ncurses-license.html
> 
> P.P.S.: If you did not already know, the FSFE started the REUSE
> initiative to make all this somewhat easier, so if you're an upstream
> developer, have a look: https://reuse.software/
> 
> [1] https://github.com/rohieb/spdx-license-match
> [2] https://buildroot.org/
> [3] https://spdx.org/licenses/
> [4] https://spdx.org/licenses/exceptions-index.html

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |

_______________________________________________
ptxdist mailing list
ptxdist@pengutronix.de