On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 09:44:11PM +0100, Martin Kepplinger wrote: > This replaces license permission statements that include a wrong postal > address of the FSF with only SPDX license identifiers; in the samples > directory. > > Signed-off-by: Martin Kepplinger <mart...@posteo.de> > --- > > I'll fold this in, in the thread here. I guess this change is what Greg > had in mind? Or would you prefer having including SPDX and removing > permission statement seperately?
I have been doing them in 2 steps, but only because the files I modified were in different "chunks" (i.e. add missing SPDX identifiers to a bunch of files in a directory, and then the second patch would remove the license identifiers for all files in that directory). As that type of patch flow doesn't make sense here, I think what you did was just fine. Nice job. Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org>
