On 29/01/2019 14:03, Thomas Huth wrote:
> On 2019-01-29 13:51, Liam Merwick wrote:
>> On 24/01/2019 10:53, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> It's either "GNU *Library* General Public version 2" or "GNU Lesser
>>> General Public version *2.1*", but there was no "version 2.0" of the
>>
>> Should the word "Licen
On 2019-01-29 13:51, Liam Merwick wrote:
> On 24/01/2019 10:53, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> It's either "GNU *Library* General Public version 2" or "GNU Lesser
>> General Public version *2.1*", but there was no "version 2.0" of the
>
> Should the word "License" be after both instances of "Public" above
On 24/01/2019 10:53, Thomas Huth wrote:
It's either "GNU *Library* General Public version 2" or "GNU Lesser
General Public version *2.1*", but there was no "version 2.0" of the
Should the word "License" be after both instances of "Public" above ?
"Lesser" library. So assume that version 2.1 i
It's either "GNU *Library* General Public version 2" or "GNU Lesser
General Public version *2.1*", but there was no "version 2.0" of the
"Lesser" library. So assume that version 2.1 is meant here.
Also some files mentioned the GPL instead of the LGPL after declaring
that the files are licensed unde
