[ I forgot to reply to this part ] > > (If yes, would a symlink AGPL -> AGPL-3.0 still be useful/desirable?) > I think, a link isn't useful. The description of a license and its > corresponding version should be as precise as possible.
I agree that we don't need the symlink, so I didn't create one. > > (Additionally, I will look for canonical URLs for those license, and will > > contact you if I don't find a good one for any of them). > > Do you want the canonical URLs in the licenses texts themselves? > > Do you want the URL from the SPDX URL which I prefer or from the the > original website like gnu.org? > > Would you like this information to appear above or below the test? As I said, you don't need to worry about this anymore. The URL sources for the licenses are in the commit message in my wip branch, which I believe it's the right place to document that. If we put the URL inside the licenses themselves, they would not be the original txt versions anymore. Thanks.
