Re: [PATCH v2 10/20] btrfs: factor a fscrypt_name matching method

David Sterba <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.kernel.vger.linux-spdx,org.kernel.vger.linux-btrfs,org.kernel.vger.linux-fscrypt
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 04:18:47PM -0600, J Lovejoy wrote:
> 
> 
> On 9/9/22 7:34 AM, David Sterba wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 06:00:13AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >> On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 12:15:21PM +0200, David Sterba wrote:
> >>>> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> >>>> +/*
> >>>> + * Copyright (C) 2020 Facebook
> >>>> + */
> >>> Please use only SPDX in new files
> >>>
> >>> https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Developer%27s_FAQ#Copyright_notices_in_files.2C_SPDX
> >> The wiki is incorrect.  The SPDX tag deals with the licensing tags
> >> only.  It is not a replacement for the copyright notice in any way, and
> >> having been involved with Copyright enforcement I can tell you that
> >> at least in some jurisdictions Copytight notices absolutely do matter.
> > I believe you and can update the wiki text so it's more explicit about
> > the license an copyright.
> 
> Can you update the wiki text to remove "SPDX" from the heading and 
> remove the sentence stating, "An initiative started in 2017 [1] aims to 
> unify licensing information in all files using SPDX tags, this is driven 
> by the Linux Foundation."

I can consider that if you tell me why I should do that, but I don't
find anything wrong with the sentence (and I wrote it originally). It's
merely stating that something happened and points to a well known linux
kernel related web site with more details about it.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.