Add SPDX identifiers

[yegorich]

Signed-off-by: Yegor Yefremov yegorslists@googlemail.com

[hartkopp]

Hi Yegor.
Thanks for picking this up!
What's the reason to tag canfdtest.c to "GPL-2.0-or-later" and not "GPL2.0-only" as in the other files?
I would recomment not to use "GPL-2.0-or-later"

[yegorich]

@hartkopp my logic is like this: if the license text in the file has the following sentence then it is GPL-2.0-or-later:

either version 2 of the License, or any later version.

An this is the case for the most C files in can-utils. See how this license type is defined in the header: https://spdx.org/licenses/GPL-2.0-or-later.html

Other files like jacd.c have GPL-2.0-only header. It would be great if all sources could be homogenized.

[hartkopp]

The stuff which was originally from Volkswagen is gpl2-or-bsd-clause3 as we intended to allow the socket API in other operating systems too. Therefore the basic tools follow this license scheme.
What would be your suggestion for the homogenization?
I would prefer GPL2-0-only for the non-VW code instead of GPL2-or-later.

[yegorich]

Let's take GPL-2.0-only then so that everything is consistent with the initial license from VW. @marckleinebudde what do you think?

[marckleinebudde]

If we want to relicense the files under GPL2-or-later, then we have to ask the original author and all contributors.

[hartkopp]

Hi @marckleinebudde ,
we wanted to unify the current GPL* files to GPL-2.0-only and NOT to GPL2-or-later.
Would this work for you?

[marckleinebudde]

Doh! I meant GPL-2.0-only. But you still have to get the ACK of all authors.

[yegorich]

So we're talking about the following files:

• slcand.c
• canfdtest.c
• slcanpty.c
• jcat.c
• can-calc-bit-timing.c

You already have my ACK for re-licensing.

@ukleinek , @grandwolf, @rshanmu, @btashton, @jmahler, @umlaeute, @sgh, @jschall, @mansr, @ftheile, @olerem, @snewz, @bombilee what do you think about it?

[sgh]

Hi I trust you guys in doing the right thing. I have no real preference, so it's an ACK from me as well. onsdag den 26. juni 2019 11.26.22 CEST skrev Yegor Yefremov:

…

So we're talking about the following files: - slcand.c - canfdtest.c - slcanpty.c - jcat.c - can-calc-bit-timing.c You already have my ACK for re-licensing. @ukleinek , @grandwolf, @rshanmu, @btashton, @jmahler, @umlaeute, @sgh, @jschall, @mansr, @ftheile, @olerem, @snewz, @bombilee what do you think about it?

-- Søren Holm

[marckleinebudde]

Acked-by: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@pengutronix.de>

[hartkopp]

Oh, just detected that slcanpty.c was written by me ... %-)

And of course GPL-2.0-only is my preference too, so:

Acked-by: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@hartkopp.net>

Tnx!

[mansr]

My contribution hardly gives me the right to an opinion here, but either way, I don't care.

[umlaeute]

what's the reason to clamp it down to GPL-2.0-only? (as in: why do you prefer it over GPL-2.0-or-later?)

[snewz]

Acked-by: Sven Schmitt sven.schmitt@gmx.net

[olerem]

Acked-by: Oleksij Rempel ore@pengutronix.de

[hartkopp]

what's the reason to clamp it down to GPL-2.0-only? (as in: why do you prefer it over GPL-2.0-or-later?)

Please check the general discussions about GPLv2 -vs- GPLv3 on the internet, e.g. the tivoization problem which makes it harder for commercial users/products.

IMHO GPLv2 serves can-utils best - and the VW code is even more relaxed with gpl2-or-bsd-clause3.

[ukleinek]

My contribution seems to be just

03c1bacfdea8 ("can-utils: trivial: fix typos concerning "separation" and "useful"")

not sure if that is relevant enough to be able to oppose a license change. Anyhow, I'm not opposed, so:

Acked-by: Uwe Kleine-König u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de

for a switch to GPL-2.0-only.

[btashton]

Acked-by: Brennan Ashton bashton@brennanashton.com

[umlaeute]

Please check the general discussions about GPLv2 -vs- GPLv3 on the internet, e.g. the tivoization problem which makes it harder for commercial users/products.

well yes; tivoization is the reason i mostly switched to GPLv3 these days :-) (but then, I mostly don't really work in the industries, so my POV might be a bit "academic")

but anyhow:

Acked-By: IOhannes m zmölnig zmoelnig@iem.at

[ftheile]

Acked-by: Frank Theile ftheile@grundfos.com

[grandwolf]

I personally prefer GPL-2.0-or-later, but well, here is my:

Acked-by: Wolfgang Grandegger wg@grandegger.com

[jmahler]

Acked-by: Jeremiah Mahler jmmahler@gmail.com

[jschall]

Acked-by: Jonathan Challinger mr.challinger@gmail.com

[hartkopp]

Regarding the missing ACKs:
I tried to mail to @rshanmu to his Renesas e-mail found in his commit to this repository and it returned with "unknown user".

Now trying to reach @bombilee on his gmail adress. His last commit is five years ago.

Stay tuned ...

[bombilee]

Acked-by: Cheng-Lung Lee chenglung@gmail.com

[umlaeute]

I tried to mail to @rshanmu to his Renesas e-mail found in his commit to this repository and it returned with "unknown user".

https://www.linkedin.com/in/rameshshanmugasundaram/ probably this helps....

[hartkopp]

Thanks! So let's wait for some more time for feedback ...

[rshanmu]

Acked-by: Ramesh Shanmugasundaram rashanmu@gmail.com

Apologies for not updating my email preferences. Corrected now. Thanks @yegorich

[yegorich]

@hartkopp what is the next step? Should this PR be merged as is and the followup PR change the licenses?

[marckleinebudde]

Sounds good. Reference this PR from the new one that changes the license to GPL-2.0-only.