On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 05:30:27PM -0400, Alex Deucher wrote: > On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 5:13 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> v4: squash in naming fixes > > To repeat what I said last time: > > | Please follow the patch submission process in SubmittingPatches: put any > > | versioning in the subject line inside the [] and put noise like inter > > | version changelogs after the ---. > I addressed this in my coverletter. Some subsystems prefer to retain > that information. If you'd prefer to not have them in the audio patch > I will remove them. When I said to follow the standard process here that's what I meant, yes. It's basically just the graphics subsystem that does something different here, and note that if you are going to include a changelog (either in the normal place or the DRM place) it really ought to actually describe the changes that have been made - the above doesn't reflect the changes that were made at all. > > I also remain very concerned about this non-GPL license you are using. > > Please do not ignore review comments like this :( > I mentioned this in the cover letter as well. Most if not all of the > drm drivers are licensed the same way. IANAL, but I am not aware of > any concerns about them. DRM is a special case here since there has always been work to share bits of the code with other operating systems, the licensing for DRM is very unusual within the kernel. A quick sampling of drivers suggests that this license is not universally used there either. There is also the issue I raised with the fact that your non-GPL license statement does not appear to correspond to the MODULE_LICENSE() that you've included which claims the code is GPLed.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
