[PATCH v3] Add LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause

[Joel Sherrill]

For the current license, we pointed people to a URL for the license for the
file. Why aren't we continuing that?

On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 8:43 PM Chris Johns <chrisj at rtems.org> wrote:

> On 27/11/2018 00:21, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> > On 23/11/2018 07:55, Sebastian Huber wrote:
> >> Copied from:
> >>
> >> https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-2-Clause.html
> >>
> >> The formatting is suitable for C/C++ source comments.
> >>
> >> Update #3053.
> >> ---
> >>   LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>   1 file changed, 39 insertions(+)
> >>   create mode 100644 LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause
> >>
> >> diff --git a/LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause b/LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause
> >> new file mode 100644
> >> index 0000000000..d19f31e646
> >> --- /dev/null
> >> +++ b/LICENSE.BSD-2-Clause
> >> @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
> >> +https://spdx.org/licenses/BSD-2-Clause.html
> >> +
> >> +This license file serves as a template for the license header in files.
> >> +
> >> +You are the copyright holder.  Copy to comment below the top of the
> file in
> >
> > There is a typo here. It should be "Copy the comment".
>
> Nice catch.
>
> > Apart from this typo, is this template all right? Chris, Gedare, Joel?
>
> I am OK.
>
> Thanks
> Chris
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> devel at rtems.org
> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20181127/70bb9eac/attachment-0002.html>