On 10/08/2013 10:23 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: > Dear Stephen, > > In message <52546f78.40...@wwwdotorg.org> you wrote: >> >>> +Ideally, the license terms of all files in the source tree should be >>> +defined by such License Identifiers; in no case a file can contain >>> +more than one such License Identifier. >> >> I assume "one such License Identifier" here is intended to mean: a >> source line prefixed with the words "SPDX-License-Identifier:". However, >> to me "one such License Identifier" would actually refer to the >> "GPL-2.0+" part of the line, since that's what actually identifies the >> license. The other text simply introduces a list of license identifiers. >> That would then conflict with the rest of the patch that goes on to >> explicitly state that multiple licenses are allowed. >> >> In other words, I think that text can be confusing. I think you need to >> add "line", "list" or "set" to the end of the sentence to make it >> unambiguous. > > Could you please suggest such a phrase? Thanks.
Sigh. As I said: In other words, I think that text can be confusing. I think you need to add "line", "list" or "set" to the end of the sentence to make it unambiguous. _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
