Hello Simon, all, Simon J. Gerraty wrote in <202508072215.577mfjpx011...@gitrepo.freebsd.org>: ... |URL: https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=5c4d1c85847d84bd86e6b12408f\ |9b5f846094f39 | |commit 5c4d1c85847d84bd86e6b12408f9b5f846094f39 |Author: Simon J. Gerraty <s...@freebsd.org> |AuthorDate: 2025-08-07 22:15:37 +0000 |Commit: Simon J. Gerraty <s...@freebsd.org> |CommitDate: 2025-08-07 22:15:37 +0000 | | Replace license with just SPDX BSD-2-Clause
That is very interesting! And .. are you really sure this is right with BSD etc licenses which explicitly require that the license text is included? So i looked and found [1] which says SPDX IDs are intending to express information about licenses. Copyright notices ‐ statements about who owns the copyright in a file or project ‐ are outside the scope of SPDX short-form IDs. Therefore, you should not remove or modify existing copyright notices in files when adding an SPDX ID. However i am sure you do not do something like this "just like that", and would be very interested -- it would be nice to be able to vaporise the file header -- i always have that pitfall moment when i look into Plan9 / 9front source code, which then simply starts off (and very often with "#include <u.h>", just like that). [1] https://spdx.dev/learn/handling-license-info/ --steffen | |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off |(By Robert Gernhardt) | |During summer's humble, here's David Leonard's grumble | |The black bear, The black bear, |blithely holds his own holds himself at leisure |beating it, up and down tossing over his ups and downs with pleasure | |Farewell, dear collar bear
