On Wed, May 09, 2018 at 02:46:54PM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Dear Tom,
In message 20180509114828.GG12235@bill-the-cat.ec.rr.com you wrote:
We should go and update [1] to note some special exemptions to the rule.
I'm not happy about this.
I see you missed out on the SPDX thread over here: https://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2018-May/327544.html and repeat
Marek already said what was on my mind, and got ignored. Would it have changed anything if I had posted another complaint?
Ignored, no. Counts as a veto? No. And if you had chimed in too, I don't know if that would have gotten anyone else to also chime in. Looking over the thread again there's two yes votes, two no votes, two people that chimed in on the thread but didn't express a yes or no to the change, and then no one else has said anything. The main thing I see currently is a whole lot of ambivalence.
I'm doing now, and apparently I get ignored, too. So what exactly is your argument?
myself, I see it as more worthwhile to (a) follow the kernel in this area (for both tooling and consistency and ease of development for our overlapping community) (b) save space (in just about every conversion we went from 2 lines to 1 line). Thanks!
OK, so you decided, and any additional discussion is futile...
It's not futile, but here's as best I can tell, the arguments: Against Linux Kernel style SPDX tags: - Don't like // style comments - Visually inconsistent / jarring
For Linux Kernel style SPDX tags: - Has higher visibility. - Has tooling to enforce correctly formatted tags. - Shorter (enforced as a single line comment means we don't have people spacing around it). - Consistent expectations for our overlapping developer community.
Things that could be taken, without changing overall formatting: - Logic operators for exceptions/dual-license/etc
If people speak up against the change now that we've done it, we could revert and then add in the "LICENSE-A OR LICENSE-B" change. Thanks!