qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 01/12] i2c: Split smbus into parts


From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 01/12] i2c: Split smbus into parts
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 20:30:33 +0100
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.0

On 20/11/18 16:47, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 16 November 2018 at 13:20, Corey Minyard <address@hidden> wrote:
On 11/15/18 4:22 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
--- /dev/null
+++ b/include/hw/i2c/smbus_eeprom.h
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@


You missed the copyright notice here.


Other files don't have copyright notices (i2c.h, for instance), and for
the smbus.[ch] case the copyrights are kind of mixed up, the include
files had the big header with a copyright by one company and the C
file had a different copyright notice by a different company.

Not a huge deal, but I didn't include it in that file because I didn't
think it was necessary.  I'm wondering if it would be best to
establish a style like Linux has, with the // SPDX... thing on the
first line.

Yeah, we have some legacy files with no copyright notice, but we
usually try to avoid that for new files. New files should have
a copyright notice and a license statement. (If you copied from
a file without a license statement, LICENSE says that means
2-or-later.)

We don't yet use SPDX headers. (They're just a different and
shorter way to write the license statement.)

Does that mean we can use them, or you rather prefer we don't?

While they are machine parseable, I find them easier to understand than the big chunk of legal text that sometime are not correctly written.

Thanks,

Phil.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]