From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS22989 209.51.188.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,URIBL_SBL,URIBL_SBL_A shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3209E1F5AE for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 10:20:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:33204 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lqCNJ-0003GZ-Pa for normalperson@yhbt.net; Mon, 07 Jun 2021 06:20:53 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:39056) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lqCGV-0000MQ-1x for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Jun 2021 06:13:51 -0400 Received: from uggla.sjd.se ([2001:9b1:8633::107]:47804) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lqCGR-0005vT-Os for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Jun 2021 06:13:50 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=josefsson.org; s=ed2101; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To :Date:References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding :Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=vPOPATPXubfAZCsSm4qjcpEdjT8Uf+XzrCZwLRMbmPE=; t=1623060826; x=1624270426; b=2Q6JUqb2TJe7byztJ4b9XCctW0rDOJkSVakhEaKNmIAad5c+THoHT9aV4v2NlpKYORd+4MAs9g wJQHeRYX0HCQ==; DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=josefsson.org; s=rsa2101; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID: In-Reply-To:Date:References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id: List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=vPOPATPXubfAZCsSm4qjcpEdjT8Uf+XzrCZwLRMbmPE=; t=1623060826; x=1624270426; b=HZ96VOfxHouerwy4yQ0I1gqxIJjv0hre1t0Fe8yd1UX4Ay2KuFTMDega4Zebu5dNIpwnjszE8f 4kEsOH/G0XXJaa8TCK+TdTW6ZeZtc0QtiHJN2UBDnlQUo7SkXRCDDvB8fvABFZ3h/y6SItyBGUMDy BWZMsZHXZrPtrT8tbLnbNCpGCAkkTiN+tSEwqv904P5kI0s1bg0jQehU8ZjQRGkuLOtjsOp0yz6lk sJ4S0aWlnPGxK8baRY4nPBK6ThMorTxoRK782mHs5TESyTwQIvCiBuqcTvXmBzDWTt2d33oYN5a4Z OR4sfzjoRTFfeutNy6LlyD3OX0T/1c1kKKh+K5fu3iW91Xdq3Kvh3oC52HH/Z33xmEOKZzAptQZlH TC0n8lWfAvaTuTiuW572u52qn6fIT6NoKoMkfVDW/4vzz/EkJ35N+uBZrXPFn26+6SDNVnpJkE ; Received: from [2001:9b1:41ac:ff00:8554:7413:c4c7:cb32] (port=44822 helo=latte) by uggla.sjd.se with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lqCGN-00021D-QU; Mon, 07 Jun 2021 10:13:43 +0000 To: Eric Blake Cc: bug-gnulib@gnu.org Subject: Re: put appropriate license notices in source files References: <13090550.mNDUoA7e8v@omega> <20210604202552.52xlrdzdwpebnrdi@redhat.com> OpenPGP: id=B1D2BD1375BECB784CF4F8C4D73CF638C53C06BE; url=https://josefsson.org/key-20190320.txt X-Hashcash: 1:22:210607:eblake@redhat.com::PUGjN5G2fS9HlVlh:0wl8 X-Hashcash: 1:22:210607:bug-gnulib@gnu.org::4eQu0ZjpzLDt9+y7:COCJ X-Hashcash: 1:22:210607:bruno@clisp.org::Z9AT/O18c4TQgLKs:Owm6 Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2021 12:13:43 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20210604202552.52xlrdzdwpebnrdi@redhat.com> (Eric Blake's message of "Fri, 4 Jun 2021 15:25:52 -0500") Message-ID: <87r1hem17s.fsf@latte.josefsson.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2001:9b1:8633::107; envelope-from=simon@josefsson.org; helo=uggla.sjd.se X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: bug-gnulib@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Gnulib discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnulib-bounces+normalperson=yhbt.net@gnu.org Sender: "bug-gnulib" Reply-to: Simon Josefsson From: Simon Josefsson via Gnulib discussion list --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Eric Blake writes: > Speaking of tools, should we include SPDX tags alongside the full text > of all our licenses, as that is yet another thing that aids > license-checking tools? > > https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/appendix-V-using-SPDX-short-identifiers-in-source-files/ I'm not a big fan of doing that -- to me it is yet another way we patch source code to solve external tooling problems, and this tool is not even used for technical purposes. I believe we've seen that over time that is a bad approach, even if a good case can be made for each improvement (like this). Another problem is that SPDX introduce the possibility of mismatch between the license mentioned by a SPDX tag and the license boiler plate (which is GNU policy and standard legal behaviour). Given that we already have some of that complexity in gnulib ('License:' clause in modules file), I'm not sure I would want to make the situation even more complex. OTOH, I don't think there needs to be a firm catch-all rule on this, if someone wants to include and maintain SPDX tags in some files. /Simon --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEARYIAB0WIQSjzJyHC50xCrrUzy9RcisI/kdFogUCYL3xVwAKCRBRcisI/kdF ogQ4AQDJac8sLDI/Jaoxf5LDtQGuhJPc7KNv4QGwhVPOyz5xgQEA+zdiJ0qwV9hZ bKYPX6Y43Ygb50AVUQ3slhZP+7XhuAs= =Oztz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--