this is version p2. I could've technically stripped those comments and changed the version number to / - 2012.02.10 : Release Version 1.1.0 */ But I didn't. Originally, it was either public domain or GPL.
Nobody would've ever found out by the code alone, which version this actually is."
Let me pull out the key statement here:
"Originally, it was either public domain or GPL."
That's an assumption. Samsung placed a license on it, and rxrz assumes that prior to that, it must have been GPL or public domain. However, the driver was unknown and didn't exist prior to rxrz's release. It seems likely something could be classified as public domain when it was kept under lock and key.
My guess is, this was given a license when the code was finished and bundled for distribution. Assuming otherwise seems dangerous, in my opinion.
"This code was originally under a Samsung proprietary license" Wrong.
exfat_version.h:/* - 2012.04.02 : P1 : Change Module License to Samsung Proprietary /
this is version p2. I could've technically stripped those comments and changed the version number to / - 2012.02.10 : Release Version 1.1.0 */ But I didn't. Originally, it was either public domain or GPL.
Nobody would've ever found out by the code alone, which version this actually is."
Let me pull out the key statement here:
"Originally, it was either public domain or GPL."
That's an assumption. Samsung placed a license on it, and rxrz assumes that prior to that, it must have been GPL or public domain. However, the driver was unknown and didn't exist prior to rxrz's release. It seems likely something could be classified as public domain when it was kept under lock and key.
My guess is, this was given a license when the code was finished and bundled for distribution. Assuming otherwise seems dangerous, in my opinion.