thanks Richard - really helpful to have others flagging these, as keeping track is enough work that I’m not having time to review also.
But could i please ask you (and others) to not remove the original text of Thomas’ email when you respond? It reduces the digging I need to do to find the original filenames and text if you top-post (as un-cool as that is, but you can just blame me for you un-coolness in this case)
thanks,
Jilayne
> On May 22, 2019, at 6:59 AM, Richard Fontana <rfontana@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 8:05 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> neither [alan] [cox] [nor] [cymrunet]
>> [ltd] admit liability nor provide warranty for any of this software
>> this material is provided as is and at no charge
>
> Since some of these disclaimer statements are getting scrutinized,
> this one is also notable though it is more general than the other ones
> that have been called out. I think we should decide what to do about
> variously-worded warranty/liability disclaimer statements in general
> and consider this variety along with others. I assume SPDX previously
> never considered the problem of how to deal with license notices with
> various nonstandard disclaimer statements other than implicitly
> treating the ones in the GNU notice as conveying nothing more than
> what's already in the GPL/LGPL license texts.
>
> For the time being I am trying to call attention to anything that
> seems even slightly interestingly different from what's in the GNU
> notice ("WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE").
>
> Richard
