Signed-off-by: Diederik de Haas <[email protected]>
---
Documentation/tools/rv/common_appendix.rst | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/tools/rv/common_appendix.rst b/Documentation/tools/rv/common_appendix.rst
index f4239192bee8..655e1bd9bbe4 100644
--- a/Documentation/tools/rv/common_appendix.rst
+++ b/Documentation/tools/rv/common_appendix.rst
@@ -13,4 +13,4 @@ COPYING
=======
Copyright \(C) 2022 Red Hat, Inc. Free use of this software is granted under
-the terms of the GNU Public License (GPL).
+the terms of the GNU General Public License (GPL).
--
2.39.0
On Sun, Jan 22, 2023 at 07:12:23PM +0100, Diederik de Haas wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Diederik de Haas <[email protected]>
> ---
> Documentation/tools/rv/common_appendix.rst | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/tools/rv/common_appendix.rst b/Documentation/tools/rv/common_appendix.rst
> index f4239192bee8..655e1bd9bbe4 100644
> --- a/Documentation/tools/rv/common_appendix.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/tools/rv/common_appendix.rst
> @@ -13,4 +13,4 @@ COPYING
> =======
>
> Copyright \(C) 2022 Red Hat, Inc. Free use of this software is granted under
> -the terms of the GNU Public License (GPL).
> +the terms of the GNU General Public License (GPL).
Similar response as [1].
Thanks.
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-doc/[email protected]/
--
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
On Monday, 23 January 2023 03:15:15 CET Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> Similar response as [1].
Please disregard this patch.
I'm now sending a similar response as I'm sending to my other patch
submissions, which is the following:
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 19:48, Diederik de Haas wrote:
> On Monday, 23 January 2023 03:15:15 CET Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>> Similar response as [1].
>
> Please disregard this patch.
> I'm now sending a similar response as I'm sending to my other patch
> submissions, which is the following:
>
> 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.
Glad to reply, but I see your reply above as if it is written by
a bot. Care to vary your sentences?
--
An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara
On Monday, 23 January 2023 14:51:57 CET Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
> > Please disregard this patch.
> > I'm now sending a similar response as I'm sending to my other patch
> > submissions, which is the following:
> >
> > 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.
>
> Glad to reply, but I see your reply above as if it is written by
> a bot. Care to vary your sentences?
I already got a bounce as I am now considered a spammer :-/
So now I got to figure out how to fix this clusterfsck, without being seen as
a spammer/bot, while also trying to minimize the burden on others.
I couldn't agree more with (the first paragraph of)
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
and I therefor consider this a legal issue and not a spelling one.
I can't answer the legal issue, hence the request for retraction.
Regards,
Diederik
Diederik de Haas <[email protected]> writes:
> On Monday, 23 January 2023 14:51:57 CET Bagas Sanjaya wrote:
>> > Please disregard this patch.
>> > I'm now sending a similar response as I'm sending to my other patch
>> > submissions, which is the following:
>> >
>> > 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.
>>
>> Glad to reply, but I see your reply above as if it is written by
>> a bot. Care to vary your sentences?
>
> I already got a bounce as I am now considered a spammer :-/
No, I don't think anybody sees you as that. Please do not worry about
Bagas; he is fond of unnecessarily picking holes in the work of others.
> So now I got to figure out how to fix this clusterfsck, without being seen as
> a spammer/bot, while also trying to minimize the burden on others.
You tried a fix which, as was pointed out, was not the right direction.
Just drop it and move onto your next contribution, and all will be well.
Thanks,
jon