> -----Original Message----- > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:tho...@monjalon.net] > 23/01/2018 16:19, Hemant Agrawal: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:tho...@monjalon.net] > > > > > 23/01/2018 14:08, Hemant Agrawal: > > > > This patch will be good if you only add SPDX to it and NOT remove > > > > the > > > original license text. > > > > i.e. only do following: > > > > > > > > > -.. BSD LICENSE > > > > > +.. SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause > > > > > > > > Around RC2 timeframe, I intend to do that. All the remaining but > > > > valid > > > license files, we will add SPDX and NOT remove the license text. > > > > > > Hemant, I don't understand why? > > [Hemant] > > > > Changing license for someone else copyright needs their ACK. However > > we can add SPDX without modifying existing license text There are large > number of other copyrights and not everyone is converting their license to > SPDX only. > > > > In case of linux kernel and uboot, as a first step they just added SPDX to > all files without removing the license text. > > > > I was thinking of doing the same so that all the files in DPDK should have > SPDX. However, we will not SPDX to files, which are not complaint to DPDK > policy. > > We will deal with them separately. > > If we don't remove the license now, it will never happen.
I have the same fear. But we can not remove other's license text without their explicit approval. W.r.t DPDK project priorities: License compliance is important than cleanup. Let's target following: 1. 100% compliance by 18.05 2. 100% Cleanup by 18.08 or 18.11 - Hemant
