Does our current patch set satisfy you? Apparently not, but by your own standards you need to consider all past stuff we've published too.
1
You're using warped interpretations of the law and are being entirely hypocritical from a purely non-legal ethical perspective...
1
You don't include attribution at all in the current work. You're not following your own rules (which have no legal basis anyway).
1
nobody includes all the necessry history in every copy either but then that wasn't my question either.
1
Sure, and the commit messages don't refer to PaX to meet any legal requirements and we don't need to have commit messages at all.
2
which is why i asked who the copyright owner is. git's way of tracking it is the author line, your commit is lying about it.
1
It isn't lying about anything and no, Git doesn't track copyright. That certainly isn't how it's used by the Linux kernel project. Bullshit.
2
This is the relevant documentation, right? git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux…
2
1
some of the relevant parts are quoted in spender's mail earlier today.
Jun 4, 2017 · 7:14 PM UTC
1