>>>>> "AT" == Axel Thimm <Axel.Thimm@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: AT> Also since there is a distinction of GPL<=2 and GPL3, the LGPL AT> should also deserve its own license tag. Of course it does; is there anything that doesn't use a tag of "LGPL" to indicate the LGPL? Does your statement indicate that you think something should be changed about the draft? I haven't yet presented a list of licenses that should receive standardized tags. - J< -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
