Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 09:48 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 10:33 +0100, Paul Howarth wrote:
I presume, though it's not explicitly stated, that GPL+ can also be used
where the license is explicitly given as "GPL version 1 or later" (e.g.
for perl and all same-as-perl licensed modules)?
Yes, this correct.
Similarly, I take LGPL+ to be suitable for packages licensed as "LGPL v2
(not 2.1) or later" as well as for LGPL of unspecified version?
Not quite:
LGPL+ is only for unversioned LGPL (I've never seen this, but it's
possible).
LGPLv2+ is for LGPL 2/2.1 or later.
Can you explain the difference, considering there is no version 1 of the
LGPL ?
Also considering that the "Full name" column of the licensing page on
the wiki specifically refers to v2.1 onwards (and not v2 onwards) for
the LGPL2 and LGPL2+ short names.
Paul.
--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
