Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 20:17:34 -0800 From: Mark Millard <markmi@dsl-only.net> To: sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu Cc: Pedro Giffuni <pfg@FreeBSD.org>, FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: SPDX tags in file? Message-ID: <09278744-3D5C-4B8A-9134-934F9CCA1FF0@dsl-only.net> In-Reply-To: <20171207035704.GA54501@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <4247a923-a297-1626-a576-a13651da90ab@FreeBSD.org> <20171207035704.GA54501@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2017-Dec-6, at 7:57 PM, Steve Kargl <sgk at =
troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 09:17:06PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
>>=20
>>> It seems that the application of SPDX license tags
>>> has been automated and done without reviewing whether
>>> the tag is correct. For example, the BSD-4-Clause
>>> tag has been placed in the files in lib/msun/bsdsrc.
>>> Given the UCB letter concerning removal of clauses
>>> 3 and 4, these files should probably have had the
>>> Copyright updated and a different SPDX clause applied.
>>>=20
>>> --=20
>>> Steve
>>=20
>> The initial sweep was done manually, but as you might have noticed, =
it=20
>> covered a lot of files and mistakes are certainly possible.
>>=20
>> The idea at this time is/was not to replace licenses: I am not a =
lawyer=20
>> but I think we may have to look at who has touched a file before =
doing=20
>> any license change. That may be a complex process.
>>=20
>> This said. checking for bsd-4-clause is a pretty good opportunity to=20=
>> review and modernize code. If the code comes from another BSD (and=20
>> particularly NetBSD as I noticed during the sweep), it is likely=20
>> upstream has updated the license as well and there may be interesting=20=
>> changes involved.
>>=20
>=20
> Not all revisions apply to all four files
>=20
> r1573 rgrimes BSD 4.4 Lite
> r8870 rgrimes Trailing whitespace
> r84210 dillon Add __FBSDID
> r92887 obrien Fix SCM ID's
> r92917 obrien Remove __P() usage.
> r93211 bde Resurrect Lite1
> r97407 keramida Assume __STDC__
> r108533 schweikh Typos and whitespace
> r129312 stefanf Remove some kludges (use C99 hexadecimal constant)
> r138924 das Cosmetic changes only
> r138925 das GC unused declaration
> r150318 bde Fixed aliasing bugs in TRUNC()
> r152566 bde Removed an unused declaration and style bugs
> r169209 bde Document current (slightly broken) handling of =
special values
> r169212 bde Fix tgamma() on some special args
> r176449 das Eliminate some warnings
> r226414 das Fix some non-standard variable declarations.
> r325966 pfg spdx
>=20
> If you don't count UCB as upstream (aka r1573), then FreeBSD is
> upstream. Looking at NetBSD the commit message for b_tgamma.c
> is "Add tgamma{,f} from FreeBSD via rudolf, netbsd at eq dot cz".
> OpenBSD is a little more complicated, but its initial version=20
> appeared in 2008 while FreeBSD's appeard in 1994.
>=20
> IMHO (non-lawyer) opinion, the only thing that might rise to the
> level of Copyright-able material would be r169212. Bruce did not
> add his name as he has done elsewhere.
>=20
> BTW, OpenBSD uses a 3-clause BSD license.
That prompted an old memory about newer code
for OpenBSD so I took a look. . .
https://www.openbsd.org/policy.html says:
ISC
The ISC copyright is functionally equivalent to a two-term BSD
copyright with language removed that is made unnecessary by the
Berne convention. This is the preferred license for new code
incorporated into OpenBSD. A sample license is available in the
file /usr/share/misc/license.template.
=3D=3D=3D
Mark Millard
markmi at dsl-only.net
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?09278744-3D5C-4B8A-9134-934F9CCA1FF0>