Re: [PATCH v2] ALSA: opl4: Add SPDX id lines to files in opl4 driver

On Wed, Feb 18, 2026 at 12:48=E2=80=AFPM Bird, Tim <[email protected]> wrot=
e:
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Richard Fontana <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2026 6:12 PM
> > To: Bird, Tim <[email protected]>
> > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]=
; [email protected]; [email protected];
> > [email protected]; [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ALSA: opl4: Add SPDX id lines to files in opl4 =
driver
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 6:=E2=80=8A23 PM Tim Bird <tim.=E2=80=8Abird@=
=E2=80=8Asony.=E2=80=8Acom> wrote: > > Add a license file for the BSD-Sourc=
e-Code license variant. > Add
> > "SPDX-License-Identifier GPL-2.=E2=80=8A0-or-later OR BSD-Source-Code" =
> to files using this license
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 6:23=E2=80=AFPM Tim Bird <[email protected]> wr=
ote:
> > >
> > > Add a license file for the BSD-Source-Code license variant.
> > > Add "SPDX-License-Identifier GPL-2.0-or-later OR BSD-Source-Code"
> > > to files using this license and the 'Alternatively...' language.
> > > Remove the boilerplate text from the files.
> >
> > [. . .]
> > > +License-Text:
> > > +
> > > +Copyright (c) <year> <owner> . All rights reserved.
> > > +
> > > +Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
> > > +modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions a=
re met:
> > > +
> > > + - Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright no=
tice,
> > > +   this list of conditions and the following disclaimer,
> > > +   without modification.
> > > +
> > > + - The name of the author may not be used to endorse or promote prod=
ucts
> > > +   derived from this software without specific prior written permiss=
ion.
> > > +
> > > +THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE AUTHOR AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND
> > > +ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, TH=
E
> > > +IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR P=
URPOSE
> > > +ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIAB=
LE FOR
> > > +ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTI=
AL
> > > +DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GO=
ODS
> > > +OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION=
)
> > > +HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, =
STRICT
> > > +LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN AN=
Y WAY
> > > +OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY =
OF
> > > +SUCH DAMAGE.
> >
> > This isn't (at least not currently) `BSD-Source-Code`. See:
> > https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-Source-Code.html
> > and https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/main/src/BSD-Source-C=
ode.xml
>
> Yeah.  I used the wording from the files in the Linux kernel.  There are =
about 3 variations of
> the wording for this license that I have found so far.  I included the UR=
L for the SPDX version
> in the kernel's license file in this patch.
>
> Here is the wording from the SPDX site:
> -----
> Redistribution and use of this software in source and binary forms, with =
or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditio=
ns are met:
>
> * Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, =
this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
> * Neither the name of Deusty nor the names of its contributors may be use=
d to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specifi=
c prior written permission of Deusty, LLC.
>
> THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS I=
S" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, TH=
E IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOS=
E ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT HOLDER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE=
 LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQ=
UENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE G=
OODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) =
HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT =
LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY O=
UT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH =
DAMAGE.
> -----
>
> While there *are* textual differences, I believe the two versions of the =
text are semantically equivalent.
>
> The one in the patch was submitted by Clemens Ladisch in the original opl=
4 driver submission.  I haven't
> done an exact count yet, but I believe this variant of the wording is use=
d in more places than other
> variants in the kernel.  My preference is to use the wording variant that=
 was most commonly used
> by kernel contributors, so that the kernel's LICENSE file matches the mos=
t places where the license
> text was replaced with an SPDX-License-Identifier line.
>
> I've been trying to avoid having to make a kernel LICENSE file for every =
minor variant of otherwise
> semantically the same license text.  I believe dealing with this plethora=
 of license variants is one reason the
> SPDX work stalled out previously.
>
> Let me know if you think the text in the kernel's License file  (for a gi=
ven license) must be an exact match
> for the spdx web site text for the license.  A separate question is wheth=
er it's appropriate to use the same
> SPDX ID for variations on the same license text.  I believe it is, in thi=
s case, but I'm open to hearing
> other opinions.

Based on your issue
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/issues/2939 I think you know
this but for the sake of others: The issue is that from the SPDX
standpoint, the identifiers are (somewhat) precisely defined.
`BSD-Source-Code`, for example, is specified in the XML file I
previously linked to. SPDX has a more informally defined notion of
what it means for a real license text to "match" a given identifier,
mostly discussed here:
https://spdx.github.io/spdx-spec/v3.0.1/annexes/license-matching-guidelines=
-and-templates/

I'd suggest perhaps waiting for SPDX to resolve the open issue - you
see that Steve Winslow seems inclined to add a new identifier for this
variant.

Richard