[U-Boot] [PATCH v3 3/4] cleanup code which handles the Android sparse image format

[Lukasz Majewski]

Hi Tom,

> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 07:28:04AM +0200, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> > Dear Steve Rae,
> > 
> > In message <1409763954-5494-4-git-send-email-srae at broadcom.com> you
> > wrote:
> > > - port dprintf() to debug()
> > > - update formatting
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Steve Rae <srae at broadcom.com>
> > > ---
> > > 
> > > Changes in v3:
> > > - use original license text
> > > 
> > > Changes in v2:
> > > - use BSD-3-Clause
> > > 
> > >  common/aboot.c | 97
> > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- 1 file
> > > changed, 56 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/common/aboot.c b/common/aboot.c
> > > index a302c92..3611feb 100644
> > > --- a/common/aboot.c
> > > +++ b/common/aboot.c
> > > @@ -28,6 +28,9 @@
> > >   * OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS
> > > SOFTWARE, EVEN IF
> > >   * ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
> > >   *
> > > + * NOTE:
> > > + *   Although it is very similar, this license text is not
> > > identical
> > > + *   to the "BSD-3-Clause", therefore, DO NOT MODIFY THIS
> > > LICENSE TEXT! */
> > 
> > I understand your intention of starting with the pristine file, and
> > then adaptng it to U-Boot, but I don't like adding a broken file in
> > patch 1/4 only to fix it later in patch 3/4. I think it would be
> > better to squash these patches.
> 
> But it would make tracking things a bit harder.  We could squash 2/4
> and 3/4 into one easy enough tho.
> 
> > Second, as already mentioned, we need to assign a SPDX ID for this.
> > 
> > Did you check with SPDX if there a matching ID?
> 
> So, we've gone round-and-round on this, and Steve is doing what I
> asked him to here.  In sum, this is _not_ BSD-3, it's a one-off from
> it with some interesting wording changes that mean we can't just call
> it BSD-3. Since there's nothing else going to use this (and frankly
> I'm mildly puzzled by how hard it is to dig up an aboot.c with sparse
> image support that doesn't have this change but also does come from a
> google domain) I didn't want to add a new license file for this
> non-standard license.
> 

Do we have the agreement here and therefore there aren't any obstacles
to include those patches to u-boot?

-- 
Best regards,

Lukasz Majewski

Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group