Signed-off-by: Diederik de Haas <[email protected]>
---
Documentation/filesystems/ext4/about.rst | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/ext4/about.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/ext4/about.rst
index cc76b577d2f4..c150519bbf3f 100644
--- a/Documentation/filesystems/ext4/about.rst
+++ b/Documentation/filesystems/ext4/about.rst
@@ -17,7 +17,8 @@ created demonstration filesystems.
License
-------
-This book is licensed under the terms of the GNU Public License, v2.
+This book is licensed under the terms of the GNU General Public License,
+v2.
Terminology
-----------
--
2.39.0
On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 07:05:51PM +0100, Diederik de Haas wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Diederik de Haas <[email protected]>
No patch description, really?
> ---
> Documentation/filesystems/ext4/about.rst | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/ext4/about.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/ext4/about.rst
> index cc76b577d2f4..c150519bbf3f 100644
> --- a/Documentation/filesystems/ext4/about.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/ext4/about.rst
> @@ -17,7 +17,8 @@ created demonstration filesystems.
>
> License
> -------
> -This book is licensed under the terms of the GNU Public License, v2.
> +This book is licensed under the terms of the GNU General Public License,
> +v2.
The doc has already SPDX identifier above. Please remmove the sentence above
instead.
In recent days, I have seen the sudden influx of s/GNU Public License/GNU
General Public License/g patches from you, for which many developers ask you to
replace with SPDX identifier instead (see [1], [2], and [3]). Please do
a tree-wide SPDX patch.
Thanks.
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
[2]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
[3]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
--
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
On Monday, 23 January 2023 03:10:58 CET Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 07:05:51PM +0100, Diederik de Haas wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Diederik de Haas <[email protected]>
>
> No patch description, really?
Please disregard this patch.
Next to 'style' issues, I now consider my initial view of the issue as a
spelling error, incorrect. I would be changing the license and IANAL. I'm also
not the copyright holder which I believe is needed to change the license.
Apologies for the noise.
On 1/23/23 19:44, Diederik de Haas wrote:
> On Monday, 23 January 2023 03:10:58 CET Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 07:05:51PM +0100, Diederik de Haas wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Diederik de Haas <[email protected]>
>>
>> No patch description, really?
>
> Please disregard this patch.
> Next to 'style' issues, I now consider my initial view of the issue as a
> spelling error, incorrect. I would be changing the license and IANAL. I'm also
> not the copyright holder which I believe is needed to change the license.
>
> Apologies for the noise.
Nice to see you reply to the review.
However, as I noticed, it seems like your NAKed review replies
have the same wording, which make me wonder if these are written
by a bot behind your email handle. Next time, please write
variate your writings (write using different words but convey
the same meaning). I'm also sometimes hard to figure out
which words should I write.
Thanks.
--
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara