Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200813002819.359374-1-sonnysasaka@chromium.org> <CAO271mneguPsiJRNjW44oGEHZSuYof0og9+cHxByqoOntjevYw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAO271mneguPsiJRNjW44oGEHZSuYof0og9+cHxByqoOntjevYw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Sep 2020 16:05:13 -0700
Message-ID: <CABBYNZL1jaVfvxAZ0GVEa2A0i_8bw_=ynYPL7z20H0ZkDVF3xA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH BlueZ] checkpatch: Ignore SPDX license tag
To:     Sonny Sasaka <sonnysasaka@chromium.org>
Cc:     BlueZ <linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Hi Sonny,

On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 3:43 PM Sonny Sasaka <sonnysasaka@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> Dear BlueZ maintainers,
>
> I saw recent patches that BlueZ started adding SPDX license tags to
> file headers. Is this where the convention is going? If so, please
> ignore this patch.

Yes, it is better that way so we don't have to keep up with the
license on every file and will probably attempt do some automation to
check if SDPX Identifier is proper.

> On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 5:28 PM Sonny Sasaka <sonnysasaka@chromium.org> wrote:
> >
> > BlueZ does not use SPDX license tag on file headers.
> >
> > ---
> >  .checkpatch.conf | 1 +
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/.checkpatch.conf b/.checkpatch.conf
> > index 419733832..72c3529c3 100644
> > --- a/.checkpatch.conf
> > +++ b/.checkpatch.conf
> > @@ -12,3 +12,4 @@
> >  --ignore PREFER_PACKED
> >  --ignore COMMIT_MESSAGE
> >  --ignore SSCANF_TO_KSTRTO
> > +--ignore SPDX_LICENSE_TAG
> > --
> > 2.26.2
> >


-- 
Luiz Augusto von Dentz