On Fri, 2007-07-20 at 11:35 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Jakub Jelinek (jakub@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > > BTW, shouldn't we start changing License: tags in packages for *GPL > > packages, so that it include the exact version? > > E.g. License: GPL2 (or GPL2only?) for GPL 2 without any later, > > LGPL2.1+ (or LGPL2.1?) for LGPL 2.1 or any later, etc. > > This is currently a task for the Packaging committee to standardize. FPC several times discussed this issue. The result had been us voting against using versioned licenses, because a) we consider the License-tag to be "informative" and not to be a legal statement nor to have a legally binding effect. b) we considered it inapplicable and to introduce too much overhead/bureaucracy, because in general, there are too many "un-numbered" variations of licenses around. Ralf -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
