apps: migrate to SPDX identifier

[jerpelea]

Summary

Most tools used for compliance and SBOM generation use SPDX identifiers This change brings us a step closer to an easy SBOM generation.

Impact

SBOM

Testing

CI

[nuttxpr]

[Experimental Bot, please feedback here]

No, this PR description does not meet the NuttX requirements. While it attempts to follow the structure, it lacks crucial details. Here's why:

• Summary: While it states the why, it's vague. What tools? What kind of SPDX identifiers? It completely omits what is changing, how the change works, and any related issue references. Example: "This change adds SPDX license identifiers to the source files within the core OS directory (e.g., sched/, drivers/). This will allow tools like [tool name] to generate a compliant SBOM. This addresses issue #[issue number]."

• Impact: Simply stating "SBOM" isn't helpful. You need to address all impact points with "YES/NO" and descriptions where necessary. For example, "Impact on documentation: YES - The README will be updated to explain how to generate an SBOM." Even if the answer is "NO", state it explicitly.

• Testing: "CI" isn't sufficient. List the specific build hosts and targets tested. Provide actual log snippets demonstrating the change's effect, not just "your testing logs here". Show the absence of SPDX identifiers before and their presence after the change. Example:

  • Build Host(s): Linux (Ubuntu 22.04), x86_64, GCC 11.2
  • Target(s): qemu-sim:default

  Testing logs before change (excerpt from sched/sched.c):

  /* No SPDX identifier present */

  Testing logs after change (excerpt from sched/sched.c):

  // SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0

In short, the PR description needs to be significantly more detailed and explicit to meet the NuttX requirements. It should provide specific information about the changes, their impact, and clear evidence of testing.

[jerpelea]

@xiaoxiang781216 please ignore can nxstyle errors

[cederom]

Thank you @jerpelea :-)

[cederom]

• Some code changes slipped in causing build errors that needs to be fixed?
• Maybe also good moment to fix reported code formatting issues?
• Or just update SPDX headers without touching the code?

[jerpelea]

@xiaoxiang781216 ready to go