Re: PATCH] Change EDK II to BSD+Patent License

[Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>]

On 03/20/19 19:42, Julien Grall wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 20/03/2019 18:25, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
>> On 03/20/19 14:03, Lars Kurth wrote:
>>> On 15/03/2019, 17:48, "Lars Kurth" <lars.kurth@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>      On 15/03/2019, 10:18, "Julien Grall" <julien.grall@arm.com> wrote:
>>> Is the issue that you don’t trust that the license specified in the
>>> files are correct?
>>
>> No -- the question is whether the license included in the files
>> mentioned is indeed the MIT license, suitable for a replacement with the
>> appropriate SPDX license ID.
>>
>>>
>>>      > (2.2.2) Files that seem to be covered by the MIT license.
>>>      >
>>>      >            OvmfPkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Xen/arch-arm/xen.h
>>>
>>> I can't identify where in the Xen tree this file came from. There is
>>> no corresponding xen.h file in the Xen tree at [xen.git] / xen /
>>> include / public / arch-arm /
>>> @Julien, @Anthony: can you clarify
>>
>> This file was first added to edk2 in b94c3ac93d57 ("Ovmf/Xen: implement
>> XenHypercallLib for ARM", 2015-02-28).
> 
> It is a copy of public/arch-arm.h. Somehow all the other projects
> created the file under arch-arm/xen.h.
> 
>>
>> https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/commit/b94c3ac93d57
>>
>> And from the Xen project (I think), it was Reviewed-by: Stefano
>> Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>. (I vaguely recall that
>> Stefano's emai has changed since.)
> 
> That's correct. He is working for Xilinx now.
> 
>>
>>>
>>>      >           
>>> OvmfPkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Xen/arch-x86/xen-x86_32.h
>>>      >           
>>> OvmfPkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Xen/arch-x86/xen-x86_64.h
>>>      >            OvmfPkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Xen/arch-x86/xen.h
>>>      >            OvmfPkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Xen/event_channel.h
>>>      >            OvmfPkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Xen/grant_table.h
>>>      >            OvmfPkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Xen/hvm/hvm_op.h
>>>      >            OvmfPkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Xen/hvm/params.h
>>>      >            OvmfPkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Xen/io/blkif.h
>>>      >            OvmfPkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Xen/io/console.h
>>>      >            OvmfPkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Xen/io/protocols.h
>>>      >            OvmfPkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Xen/io/ring.h
>>>      >            OvmfPkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Xen/io/xenbus.h
>>>      >            OvmfPkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Xen/io/xs_wire.h
>>>      >            OvmfPkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Xen/memory.h
>>>      >            OvmfPkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Xen/xen-compat.h
>>>      >            OvmfPkg/Include/IndustryStandard/Xen/xen.h
>>>
>>> These all appear to originate from [xen.git] / xen / include / public
>>> In the Xen tree these all have explicit MIT licenses, which implies
>>> that the license headers are indeed correct.
>>
>> Thanks -- so can we replace the license blocks with
>>
>>    SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
>>
>> ? (See e.g. <https://spdx.org/ids-how>.)
> 
> I spoke with Lars today, this identifier would be suitable for the headers.
> 
> Cheers,
> 

Thanks!
Laszlo