From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754827AbdKIOAd (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Nov 2017 09:00:33 -0500 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([65.50.211.133]:48280 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752881AbdKIOAb (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Nov 2017 09:00:31 -0500 Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2017 06:00:27 -0800 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Greg Kroah-Hartman Cc: "Luis R. Rodriguez" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Berg , Takashi Iwai , Jiri Kosina , Ciaran Farrell , Christopher De Nicolo , Jeff Mahoney , Vojtech Pavlik , Mel Gorman , Hannes Reinecke , Alan Cox , Christoph Hellwig , Russell King , "Theodore Ts'o" , "Darrick J. Wong" , Kate Stewart , Philippe Ombredanne Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] driver core: Remove redundant license text Message-ID: <20171109140027.GA9959@infradead.org> References: <20171107163009.13544-1-gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> <20171107163009.13544-5-gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> <20171108182630.GP22894@wotan.suse.de> <20171109134740.GD6545@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171109134740.GD6545@kroah.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.3 (2017-05-23) X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by bombadil.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 09, 2017 at 02:47:40PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > Was not what? Discussed? Yes it was. I think the lwn.net article even > says so. There is absolutely no public track record of any discussion. And if there was any it seems like a large number of the biggest contributors and copyright holders in the kernel were excluded. So please state what was decided, where it was deciced, who decided it and why as a start. This whole debacle is not how we normally communicate big changes in the kernel community, and that is double worrisome because it is an important area with legal implications. > "which" tag is just SPDX, that's easy. As for "when and how", I don't > understand the question. And where is our defintion of SPDX in our kernel tree? As said in another thread, yes I can google it. But that doesn't provide a stable defintion, nevermind that we do not even have a pointer to it from anywhere in the tree. If your use of SPDX is apparently fine because people must know I'll just invent my own tags and mandate them [1]. [1] not that I have anything about the SPDX tags in particular, it's just the way you rush them in without even defining them for us.