[20.08] license: removing the dual prefix to avoid confusion

  This patch removes the dual keyword from dual license
definitions to avoid confusion. As the *dual* word is
not required to be added SPDX license.

Signed-off-by: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
---
 license/exceptions.txt | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
  

On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 11:28:40 +0530
Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com> wrote:

> This patch removes the dual keyword from dual license
> definitions to avoid confusion. As the *dual* word is
> not required to be added SPDX license.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
> ---
>  license/exceptions.txt | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/license/exceptions.txt b/license/exceptions.txt
> index c984764a0..3afb996ed 100644
> --- a/license/exceptions.txt
> +++ b/license/exceptions.txt
> @@ -5,8 +5,8 @@ IP License policy as defined in DPDK Charter available at:
>  
>  Note that following licenses are not exceptions:-
>  	- BSD-3-Clause
> -	- Dual BSD-3-Clause OR GPL-2.0
> -	- Dual BSD-3-Clause OR LGPL-2.1
> +	- BSD-3-Clause OR GPL-2.0
> +	- BSD-3-Clause OR LGPL-2.1
>  	- GPL-2.0  (*Only for kernel code*)
>  
>  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Makes sense to me, but probably needs Board legal approval
  

Hi Bruce,
	Will you please check it with Trishan and DPDK GB board?

DPDK license indicates the correct license types in: 
http://git.dpdk.org/dpdk/tree/license/README

However in exception files we added the keyword "Dual" - which is unnecessary and not part of standard SPDX definition. 

I hope they have no objection in getting it corrected.

Regards,
Hemant

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@networkplumber.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2020 10:52 PM
> To: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [20.08 PATCH] license: removing the dual prefix to
> avoid confusion
> Importance: High
> 
> On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 11:28:40 +0530
> Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com> wrote:
> 
> > This patch removes the dual keyword from dual license definitions to
> > avoid confusion. As the *dual* word is not required to be added SPDX
> > license.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
> > ---
> >  license/exceptions.txt | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/license/exceptions.txt b/license/exceptions.txt index
> > c984764a0..3afb996ed 100644
> > --- a/license/exceptions.txt
> > +++ b/license/exceptions.txt
> > @@ -5,8 +5,8 @@ IP License policy as defined in DPDK Charter available at:
> >
> >  Note that following licenses are not exceptions:-
> >  	- BSD-3-Clause
> > -	- Dual BSD-3-Clause OR GPL-2.0
> > -	- Dual BSD-3-Clause OR LGPL-2.1
> > +	- BSD-3-Clause OR GPL-2.0
> > +	- BSD-3-Clause OR LGPL-2.1
> >  	- GPL-2.0  (*Only for kernel code*)
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -----------------------------
> 
> Makes sense to me, but probably needs Board legal approval
  

ping ...

Thomas - this change is very trivial

On 7/28/2020 11:28 AM, Hemant Agrawal wrote:
> This patch removes the dual keyword from dual license
> definitions to avoid confusion. As the *dual* word is
> not required to be added SPDX license.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
> ---
>   license/exceptions.txt | 4 ++--
>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/license/exceptions.txt b/license/exceptions.txt
> index c984764a0..3afb996ed 100644
> --- a/license/exceptions.txt
> +++ b/license/exceptions.txt
> @@ -5,8 +5,8 @@ IP License policy as defined in DPDK Charter available at:
>   
>   Note that following licenses are not exceptions:-
>   	- BSD-3-Clause
> -	- Dual BSD-3-Clause OR GPL-2.0
> -	- Dual BSD-3-Clause OR LGPL-2.1
> +	- BSD-3-Clause OR GPL-2.0
> +	- BSD-3-Clause OR LGPL-2.1
>   	- GPL-2.0  (*Only for kernel code*)
>   
>   ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  

28/07/2020 07:58, Hemant Agrawal:
> This patch removes the dual keyword from dual license
> definitions to avoid confusion. As the *dual* word is
> not required to be added SPDX license.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
> ---
>  Note that following licenses are not exceptions:-
>  	- BSD-3-Clause
> -	- Dual BSD-3-Clause OR GPL-2.0
> -	- Dual BSD-3-Clause OR LGPL-2.1
> +	- BSD-3-Clause OR GPL-2.0
> +	- BSD-3-Clause OR LGPL-2.1
>  	- GPL-2.0  (*Only for kernel code*)

Applied, thanks and sorry for the delay.
I guess I was waiting for a board approval as reply to the patch.