On 11/04/2017 11:39 AM, Mattia Verga wrote: > I'm reviewing a new package to be included in Fedora repos. [1] > As always, I'm making confusion between GPLv2+ and GPLv3+... license in spec file is "GPLv3+ and MIT", but some sources are licensed GPLv2+ and LGPLv2+ also. The COPYING file itself distributed in sources is a GPLv2 license.> > What license is right to be write in spec file? > Mattia In that source archive i see: GPLv2 GPLv2+ GPLv3+ LGPLv2+ LGPLv3+ GPLv2 is more restrictive but compatible with GPLv2+ only, not with GPLv3+. LGPLv2+ and LGPLv3+ code can be released under GPLv3+. MIT is always GPL compatible. If i have correctly understood the License Compatibility and Relicensing rules, the correct resultant license is (GPLv2 or GPLv2+) and GPLv3+ -- -- Antonio Trande sagitter AT fedoraproject dot org See my vCard.
begin:vcard fn:Antonio Trande n:Trande;Antonio org:Fedora Project adr:;;https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Sagitter;;;;Italy email;internet:sagitter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx note;quoted-printable:GPG Key: 0xD5C73C16131EEDF8948AA719C05E8F07B96A706C=0D=0A= Check GPG keys on https://keys.fedoraproject.org/. x-mozilla-html:FALSE version:2.1 end:vcard
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ legal mailing list -- legal@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to legal-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
