tps://spdx.org/licenses/>,
<https://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/rms-article-for-claritys-sake-please-dont-say-licensed-under-gnu-gpl-2>
and <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/identify-licenses-clearly.html>.
2017-07-08T17:38:50-0300 Adonay Felipe Nogueira wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have an
Indeed. things under GPL 2 (notice the lack of "+"/"or later") can't
adapt/depend on things under GPL 3.
Things under both GPL 2 and its "+"/"or later" version can't
adapt/depend on things under Apache 2.0. However, things under GPL 3 and
its "+"/"or later" version can.
Sorry, I *am* subscribed, I forgot to edit the message in order to
remove that note. :)
Hi all,
I have an issue to report. However, please note that I'm not subscribed
to this mailing list, so I'd recommend you to Cc me when replying.
For a short description of the issue, see:
[[https://labs.parabola.nu/issues/1405]].
However, we must also note that Archweb is now newer than the
