Hi Alex, License: GPL-2 Warning: 'license: GPL-2' is not a recognised license.
License: GPL-2+ cabal: hlint.cabal:6: Parse of field 'license' failed. This doesn't seem particularly attractive, given License: GPL, on a reasonable reading, probably means GPL v1.0 and above, or just GPL v1.0 - unlikely to be what anyone intended. Thanks, Neil On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 1:18 AM, Alexander Dunlap <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 9:29 AM, Neil Mitchell <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I just got approached by Fedora maintainers with the query that HLint >> doesn't specify it's license fully. The License field in the cabal >> file says "GPL", and the LICENSE file has a copy of the GPL v2, but I >> never say GPL version 2, or GPL version 2 and above etc. What is the >> Cabal approved way to indicate your licensing constraints? I suspect >> all other distro's packaging HLint have just guessed, or gone GPL 2 >> because that's clearly a subset of what I might have intended. >> >> Thanks, Neil >> >> PS. For anyone who stumbles across this email, the intention was to >> license HLint under the GPL v2, but if that license doesn't suit >> someone, email me. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> cabal-devel mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel >> > > I think you just specify the license as GPL-2. > > Alex > _______________________________________________ cabal-devel mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cabal-devel
