Re: license naming

ng0 skribis: > My "problem", or rather the question I pose is: Does it make sense to > adjust how the license is displayed? Like instead of "GPL 2" We'd display > "GPL 2.0 only" and instead of "GPL 2+" (no example at hand to test if this > is the current display) we'd display "GPL 2

Re: license naming

Jelle Licht transcribed 2.3K bytes: > > ng0 writes: > > > I've just read this link: > > https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/rms-article-for-claritys-sake-please-dont-say-licensed-under-gnu-gpl-2 > > > > Full Quote: > > > >> In this article, For Clarity's Sake, Please Don't Say "Licensed

Re: license naming

ng0 writes: > I've just read this link: > https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/rms-article-for-claritys-sake-please-dont-say-licensed-under-gnu-gpl-2 > > Full Quote: > >> In this article, For Clarity's Sake, Please Don't Say "Licensed under GNU >> GPL 2"!, Free Software Foundation

license naming

I've just read this link: https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/rms-article-for-claritys-sake-please-dont-say-licensed-under-gnu-gpl-2 Full Quote: > In this article, For Clarity's Sake, Please Don't Say "Licensed under GNU GPL > 2"!, Free Software Foundation president Richard Stallman (RMS) explains