Wayland not MIT-licensed / FAQ wrong

[Steven Newbury]

On Mon Jun 1 08:16:32 2015 GMT+0100, Pekka Paalanen wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Jun 2015 12:25:37 +1000
> Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer at who-t.net> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 02:09:43AM +0200, Markus Slopianka wrote:
> > > On Monday 01 June 2015 09:26:56 Peter Hutterer wrote:
> > > 
> > > > but given that this is a significant rewording of the license text (even if
> > > > the functionality stays the same) we're basically down to: is this a license
> > > > change? and I'll have to shrug as well here and defer to the lawyers.
> > > 
> > > I could ask a FSFE lawyer friend of mine.
> > 
> > that's d be great, thanks.
> 
> (re-adding CCs)
> 
> Hi Markus, Kristian,
> 
> since I'm not completely alone with my worries here, I too would like to
> hear what your friend has to say before we do any changes. I do not
> have any such connections myself.
> 
> I'm still not really sure which license we would like to pick if we can
> change it without stomping on any contributor's rights. Maybe the
> following would be of guidance?
> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/xserver/tree/COPYING
> 
> Kristian, isn't the xserver COPYING file's first license (called MIT
> and preferred) the one you wanted to use?
> 
IANAL, but since the annouced license was always MIT, and that was the understanding of (all?) contributors, doesn't the repo just have the wrong COPYING file? Isn't it just a “bug”?