From owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Fri Dec 8 13:34:48 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87798E83A86 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 13:34:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pfg@FreeBSD.org) Received: from sonic303-36.consmr.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (sonic303-36.consmr.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [98.137.64.217]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D27672310 for ; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 13:34:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pfg@FreeBSD.org) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1512740081; bh=cdGDpCmtIQyiJrGQgQ+XpTWhVCzB9DnW2OGL7Ow1s20=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From:Subject; b=hYLfEYY7L9QOmN52jCMOBUTnTBcukhBqLli9/IcStIk7hcesqg3UQh8upOeWbD+ZpBSJCiDZF5E4r3AP/WfDDQucgG0X/vlXBtUIco5kaLN/lnGVRbf0pLVUwpcBjK0nG7CQsHeewzCU+salLXGSOLg3iDh8jKGeRAVVyO28AVrA+G2P6CGLD9SNzoJs1VIhXWjhcAOSutf6BjuzyWKL2Hm+XhWWDvom69E8xfuGctzW/Hj/Dz7FDpxawCxeijfNtov/mnMluZc7jdV79sERSubrEOsgjJWzrLP/xJ3H6OmInMr3b/8QMOp0kfIfeG4lmey+ArSHVkFcQJkVyurWog== X-YMail-OSG: 3KUl99YVM1mCdeLKSL2CmTsXVJbNMa7AIcGRkODT5dO9oF4A13_PP2rO2O4qx.B ZXJxKvhAyHWK4lsJI1bImnBvvLM9XcB_ed1gtgpvm7fkigwXx8qFOvZYW48a26ZeRBGwZYSLW3eF 8Tt.nZgv0ZRBQLKYHSkbCGvx.5OGphfMRziS1Z1ivZmO1v0dutk0u.w4C3.aEjJi4kjCepaFVX7n Fkd.Cs0rTrvfYWimaLQ.Z23ErUYGm44HAqHuDAhx0s93sc1Pd9Ye3Tp9EKXDvb.SQ_owPO0NKLov 4c_VaxqOoWBFoONLHuNQWASqxVcdiJ3XGjWj6eayIqdQIDRNQTzlJs75EtEp5Aal1Vi2r4Vetzkl epe9Qk.Y02iWYFmfqCIJW2OtHDkw4uckLIVkE.nSTYPKmAK9sSWwUew54vzE1CluPqBF8eZPeYNr T1EyQTimhwRgfJvQ71S6LnduJjBe6acogB0TMykuSxL8Jnn8ph6juu1viVwv3O_lSSV1AuB8z Received: from sonic.gate.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by sonic303.consmr.mail.gq1.yahoo.com with HTTP; Fri, 8 Dec 2017 13:34:41 +0000 Received: from smtpgate101.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (EHLO [192.168.0.5]) ([10.214.169.33]) by smtp405.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (JAMES SMTP Server ) with ESMTPA ID 406043424; Fri, 08 Dec 2017 13:34:36 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: SPDX tags in file? To: sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu Cc: FreeBSD Hackers References: <4247a923-a297-1626-a576-a13651da90ab@FreeBSD.org> <20171207035704.GA54501@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> From: Pedro Giffuni Organization: FreeBSD Project Message-ID: <97afe097-db4b-0dc6-fba0-a9d6ad43576e@FreeBSD.org> Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 08:34:36 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20171207035704.GA54501@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2017 13:34:48 -0000 Hello; On 06/12/2017 22:57, Steve Kargl wrote: > On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 09:17:06PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote: >>> 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. >>> >>> -- >>> Steve >> The initial sweep was done manually, but as you might have noticed, it >> covered a lot of files and mistakes are certainly possible. >> >> The idea at this time is/was not to replace licenses: I am not a lawyer >> but I think we may have to look at who has touched a file before doing >> any license change. That may be a complex process. >> >> This said. checking for bsd-4-clause is a pretty good opportunity to >> review and modernize code. If the code comes from another BSD (and >> particularly NetBSD as I noticed during the sweep), it is likely >> upstream has updated the license as well and there may be interesting >> changes involved. >> > Not all revisions apply to all four files > > 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 > > 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 > appeared in 2008 while FreeBSD's appeard in 1994. > > 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. Just to make this clear: SPDX license tagging is not about *changing* or even interpreting the license, only about highlighting it to make it easier to identify for other tools. If the license is wrong or outdated, then my understanding is we have to check with everyone that has done considerable changes in the file. > BTW, OpenBSD uses a 3-clause BSD license. > Another advantage in SPDX is that it helps find older licenses so we can check the files upstream for updates. OpenBSD has been moving from BSD-3-Clause to ISC. NetBSD has been moving from BSD-4-Clause or BSD-3-Clause to BSD-2-Clause-NetBSD. Such changes always deserve independent commits. Pedro.