Skip to content

Conversation

@rwmjones
Copy link

SPDX (https://spdx.org/licenses/) is a commonly used system for annotating source files with the intended license. In WDK, the top level LICENSE file describes the license as MS-PL, but individual files are less clear about the exact license. This has caused confusion in the past
(#60). By annotating files with SPDX the license can be clarified by the addition of a single line.

This change was done largely using the script below, followed by some light hand editing:

perl -i -e 'while (<>) { if ($. <= 5 && m/(.*)Copyright.*Microsoft/) { print; print "$1SPDX-License-Identifier: MS-PL\r\n"; } else { print } } continue { close ARGV if eof }' -- $( git ls-files )

SPDX (https://spdx.org/licenses/) is a commonly used system for
annotating source files with the intended license.  In WDK, the top
level LICENSE file describes the license as MS-PL, but individual
files are less clear about the exact license.  This has caused
confusion in the past
(microsoft#60).  By
annotating files with SPDX the license can be clarified by the
addition of a single line.

This change was done largely using the script below, followed by some
light hand editing:

  perl -i -e 'while (<>) { if ($. <= 5 && m/(.*)Copyright.*Microsoft/) { print; print "$1SPDX-License-Identifier: MS-PL\r\n"; } else { print } } continue { close ARGV if eof }' -- $( git ls-files )

Signed-off-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>
@rwmjones rwmjones requested review from a team as code owners November 10, 2025 13:17
@rwmjones
Copy link
Author

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree company="Red Hat, Inc."

Copy link
Member

@msscolee msscolee left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Approved for the changes under sd and storage directories.

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree company="Microsoft"

@JakobL-MSFT
Copy link
Contributor

I appreciate the effort, but, frankly, as I balance it out, I am not sure this is a good change or an important area to improve.

We are with this change emphasizing explicitness at the cost of redundancy and compactness. Frankly, I am more inclined to go to in different direction and delete lines referencing root of repo.

I may be wrong in this balance, and I will keep an open mind to be proven wrong.

Copy link
Contributor

@JakobL-MSFT JakobL-MSFT left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I appreciate the effort, but, frankly, as I balance it out, I am not sure this is a good change or an important area to improve.

We are with this change emphasizing explicitness at the cost of redundancy and compactness. Frankly, I am more inclined to go to in different direction and delete lines referencing root of repo.

I may be wrong in this balance, and I will keep an open mind to be proven wrong.

@rwmjones
Copy link
Author

@JakobL-MSFT
Copy link
Contributor

Thank you for sharing discussion. I am intrigued. I will ask around internally at MSFT to see what the consensus is.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants