From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:53512 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753543AbdKGHj3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Nov 2017 02:39:29 -0500 Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2017 08:39:40 +0100 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman Subject: Re: WTF? Re: [PATCH] License cleanup: add SPDX GPL-2.0 license identifier to files with no license Message-ID: <20171107073940.GB4654@kroah.com> References: <20171107020607.GA26910@magnolia> <20171107072040.GB4586@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171107072040.GB4586@infradead.org> Sender: linux-xfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: List-Id: xfs To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: "Darrick J. Wong" , Eric Sandeen , xfs , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 11:20:40PM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > NAK, for both the libxfs patch and the kernel one. What libxfs patch? And what "kernel one" are you referring to here? > I wrote the file and it has no copyright header because it conatians > trivial, non-copyrightable code. What file exactly? And from what I know, there is nothing that is "non-copyrightable". And this isn't changing the copyright of _ANYTHING_ it is just putting the explicit license of the file, on each file in the kernel, because it needs to be tracked. > I don't know why people think they can touch license information on > files I've written without even asking me. Nothing was changed, the license should be the exact same as it was before. But as I don't know what file you are referring to here, it's a bit hard to determine what you are talking about exactly :( thanks, greg k-h