On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 09:14:07PM -0400, Martin K. Petersen wrote:
>
> James,
>
> > There's two problems. One is simple terminology: the
> > Documentation/process/licence-rules.rst say:
> >
> > GPL-2.0 means GPL 2 only
> > GPL-2.0+ means GPL 2 or later
> >
> > I believe RMS made a fuss about th
James,
> There's two problems. One is simple terminology: the
> Documentation/process/licence-rules.rst say:
>
> GPL-2.0 means GPL 2 only
> GPL-2.0+ means GPL 2 or later
>
> I believe RMS made a fuss about this and he finally agreed to
>
> GPL-2.0-only
> GPL-2.0-or-later
Looks like there are
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 5:35 PM James Bottomley
wrote:
>
> * This file is licensed under GPLv2.
>
> In all the libsas files, but then muddied the water by quoting GPLv2
> verbatim (which includes the or later than language).
Ok, thanks for the explanation. And yes, that would have likely
confused
Linus,
> That said, I would tend to trust the due diligence that Thomas, Greg &
> co have done, and am wondering why the scsi tree ends up having
> different SPDX results in the first place..
I left Christoph's patches in my 5.3 queue after Stephen let me know
about the treewide series because,
On Thu, 2019-06-20 at 17:07 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 4:59 PM Stephen Rothwell u> wrote:
> >
> > At what point does it become worth while to do a back merge of
> > v5.2-rc4 (I think the last of the SPDX changes went into there) to
> > take care of all these (rather th
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 4:59 PM Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>
> At what point does it become worth while to do a back merge of v5.2-rc4
> (I think the last of the SPDX changes went into there) to take care of
> all these (rather than Linus having to edit each of these files himself
> during the merge
Hi all,
On Tue, 28 May 2019 11:43:20 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> On Wed, 22 May 2019 10:08:34 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
> wrote:
> >
> > Today's linux-next merge of the scsi tree got conflicts in:
> >
> > drivers/scsi/hosts.c
...
> > between commits:
> >
> > 457c89965399 ("t
Hi all,
On Wed, 22 May 2019 10:08:34 +1000 Stephen Rothwell
wrote:
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the scsi tree got conflicts in:
>
> drivers/scsi/hosts.c
> drivers/scsi/libsas/sas_task.c
> drivers/scsi/scsi.c
> drivers/scsi/scsi_error.c
> drivers/scsi/scsi_ioctl.c
> drivers/scsi/s
Thanks Stephen's help.
Ching Huang
Stephen Rothwell 於 2019年1月14日 週一 上午10:48寫道：
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the scsi tree got a conflict in:
>
> drivers/scsi/arcmsr/arcmsr_hba.c
>
> between commit:
>
> 750afb08ca71 ("cross-tree: phase out dma_zalloc_coherent()")
>
> from Linus
On Fri, 2014-01-24 at 13:05 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the scsi tree got conflicts in
> drivers/scsi/hpsa.c and drivers/scsi/hpsa.h between commits from Linus'
> tree and commits from the scsi tree.
>
> This has happened because what you submitted t
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 12:29 AM, James Bottomley
wrote:
>
> By the way, Linus, the patch says:
>
> Cc: Dan Williams
> Cc: Alan Stern
> Cc: James Bottomley
> Cc: Borislav Petkov
> Cc: linux-scsi
>
> But best I can tell it never went to either me or linux-scsi.
Both you an
On Fri, 2012-07-20 at 10:32 +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the scsi tree got a conflict in
> drivers/scsi/scsi_wait_scan.c between commit eea03c20ae38 ("Make
> wait_for_device_probe() also do scsi_complete_async_scans()") from Linus'
> tree and commit 01
12 matches
Mail list logo
