2022-05-16 19:41:15

by Thomas Gleixner

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [patch 8/9] scripts/spdxcheck: Exclude dot files

On Mon, May 16 2022 at 16:22, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 3:55 PM Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> None of these files
>>
>> .clang-format, .cocciconfig, .get_maintainer.ignore, .gitattributes,
>> .gitignore, .mailmap
>>
>> have copyrightable content. They are configuration files which use a
>> publicly documented format.
>
> Should this files remove their SPDX-License-Identifier? If yes, we
> should do that for `.clang-format`.
>
> As another suggestion, we should check that the ignored files actually
> do _not_ have the `SPDX-License-Identifier` (i.e. so the above case
> would trigger a diagnostic).

Good questions. I'm happy to drop this patch for now until this
discussion has been settled.

Thanks,

tglx


2022-05-18 13:40:07

by Greg Kroah-Hartman

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [patch 8/9] scripts/spdxcheck: Exclude dot files

On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 08:43:52PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, May 16 2022 at 16:22, Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> > On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 3:55 PM Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >> None of these files
> >>
> >> .clang-format, .cocciconfig, .get_maintainer.ignore, .gitattributes,
> >> .gitignore, .mailmap
> >>
> >> have copyrightable content. They are configuration files which use a
> >> publicly documented format.
> >
> > Should this files remove their SPDX-License-Identifier? If yes, we
> > should do that for `.clang-format`.
> >
> > As another suggestion, we should check that the ignored files actually
> > do _not_ have the `SPDX-License-Identifier` (i.e. so the above case
> > would trigger a diagnostic).
>
> Good questions. I'm happy to drop this patch for now until this
> discussion has been settled.

I've now taken all patches in this series except for this one.

thanks for doing this work,

greg k-h