Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230628171108.1150742-1-gary@garyguo.net> <CANiq72miVic=P+qSobuUqXoCuKW30_tT_buD8MyEsyVb_uoj6w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230809230249.01ffc009.gary@garyguo.net>
In-Reply-To: <20230809230249.01ffc009.gary@garyguo.net>
From:   Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 10 Aug 2023 00:29:06 +0200
Message-ID: <CANiq72nWArGsvWVVknPdAVYUbWqJKfwOAVCRUmLnuAHAHP+rSQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rust: macros: add `paste!` proc macro
To:     Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net>
Cc:     Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
        Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@gmail.com>,
        Wedson Almeida Filho <wedsonaf@gmail.com>,
        Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_Roy_Baron?= <bjorn3_gh@protonmail.com>,
        Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@proton.me>,
        Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@samsung.com>,
        Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@google.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 12:02=E2=80=AFAM Gary Guo <gary@garyguo.net> wrote:
>
> Sorry I forgot to add license comments!

No problem at all :)

> All my kernel contributions are permissively licensed if possible, so I
> am fine with this being either MIT or GPL-2.0 (I think GPL-2.0 is
> deprecated in as a SPDX license identifier and it should be
> GPL-2.0-only going forward, though).

Yeah, the 3.0 version of the SPDX license list deprecated `GPL-2.0`,
but the kernel still allows `GPL-2.0` and lists it first. I recall
thinking about this before the initial merge, and I think I went with
the original form because the main `COPYING` file still uses that.
After that I am just keeping it consistent, though I am not sure when
the kernel will migrate.

> Given this is non-kernel specific generic code, I think it might worth
> following the convention of the paste and pin-init code and make it
> `Apache-2.0 OR MIT`? This would also make it the same license as the
> `paste` crate (although we don't have to keep the same license as this
> is a different implementation).
>
> I'll leave the final decision to you.

Since you prefer it and it makes sense that someone may want to use it
(`concat` and `expand`) elsewhere, let's go with that. I will add:

    // SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 OR MIT

then. Thanks for the very quick reply!

Cheers,
Miguel