On Thu, Nov 04, 2021 at 08:15:40AM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > Tools consuming SPDX license identifiers benefit from having > the SPDX tag in its own comment, not embedded with the license > text. Move the tag to the first line.
Do you have an example of such a tool which has problems ? AFAIK, guidance for adding SPDX tags merely says they should be in a comment near the top of the file. I wouldn't expect license scanners to care about the acutal comment syntax. Proper tools would be designed to scan for tags in *any* file format, so would be unlikely to be parsing the C code comments at all. Rather scanners would be just looking for the magic string "SPDX-License-Identifier" in the file. Use of comments is merely to stop the C compiler interpreting the tag. It makes sense to have the SPDX tag as the first thing in the file, but I don't see a compelling need to make it into its own dedicated opened + closed comment, separately from the license header comment. Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|
