https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1971315 --- Comment #4 from Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@xxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Robert-André Mauchin 🐧 from comment #3) > The most restrictive license is GPLv2,so you can put this in the License > field, but you can also put all of them if you wish with a comment > specifying the license breakdown. Oh, OK, I found [1], which supports using just the "effective" license. However, the diagram in [2] suggests that neither of GPLv2 and GPLv3 are a "superset" of each other, so I guess the effective license should be "GPLv2 and GPLv3" to be technically correct? (I don't know, maybe I'm overthinking it?) > Package approved. Thanks! [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing:FAQ?rd=Licensing/FAQ#What_is_.22effective_license.22_and_do_I_need_to_know_that_for_the_License:_tag.3F [2] https://dwheeler.com/essays/floss-license-slide.html -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
