Re: [PATCH] udf: Fix full name of the GPL
From: Diederik de Haas
Date: Mon Jan 23 2023 - 10:58:38 EST
On Monday, 23 January 2023 16:48:39 CET Jan Kara wrote:
> On Sun 22-01-23 20:16:03, Diederik de Haas wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Diederik de Haas <didi.debian@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > fs/udf/ecma_167.h | 2 +-
> > fs/udf/osta_udf.h | 2 +-
> > 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> Thanks. I've added the patch to my tree.
While I initially saw it as a spelling error, I've since changed my view that
it would actually be changing the license and I'm not qualified to do that.
See https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/2281101.Yu7Ql3qPJb@prancing-pony/
While it seemed reasonable to *assume* that the GNU General Public License was
meant, I (now) think that is not sufficient when it comes to legal/license
material, which this is. I think, but I'm not a lawyer.
So maybe it's better to remove/revert it from your tree?
Sorry,
DiederikAttachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.