On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 12:50:37PM -0400, Allison Randal wrote:
> On 5/24/19 12:02 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Fri, 24 May 2019, Richard Fontana wrote:
> >> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 6:12 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> From: Thomas Gleixner tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>>
> >>> Based on 1 normalized pattern(s):
> >>>
> >>> this program is free software you can redistribute it and or modify
> >>> it under the terms of the gnu general public license as published by
> >>> the free software foundation either version 2 of the license or at
> >>> your option any later version this program is distributed in the
> >>> hope that it will be useful but without any warranty without even
> >>> the implied warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular
> >>> purpose see the gnu general public license for more details the full
> >>> gnu general public license is in this distribution in the file
> >>> called copying
> >>
> >> I just want to note that the final sentence/paragraph in this pattern,
> >> alerting the user to the location of the license text ("The full GNU
> >> General Public License is in this distribution in the file called
> >> COPYING.") arguably raises its own sort of "keep intact" issue,
> >> separate from the things we've been more focused on (notices of the
> >> applicability of the license, and warranty/liability disclaimers
> >> juxtaposed with the license notice). This may have come up in earlier
> >> cases I looked at but if so I didn't think about it.
> >
> > The reference to the COPYING file is all over the place. But what's
> > worrysome about that? I'd be worried if the boilerplate would be BSD and
> > then point to the COPYING file in the kernel tree, but a plain GPL boiler
> > plate?
> >
> > I can't see how that might change anything, the SPDX identifier is
> > documented to be a placeholder for the full license text which is in the
> > LICENSES directory and pointed to from the reworked COPYING file.
>
> Agreed with Thomas. And besides, it's actually inaccurate for the file
> to say that the full text of the GPL is in the COPYING file, because in
> the Kernel the COPYING file does not contain the text of the GPL, it
> only contains a pointer to it.
Originally it did, that changed only recently.
thanks,
greg k-h
