That is a really good point about the other lists, David. (good to hear from you again on this list!!)
Jilayne > On Mar 26, 2015, at 2:36 PM, Wheeler, David A <dwhee...@ida.org> wrote: > > J Lovejoy: >> GPL-3.0 WITH LGPL-3.0 (this feels a bit odd, but it would be accurate >> technically speaking…) [or] >> LGPL-3.0 > > I strongly believe “LGPL-3.0” is the correct answer. "LGPL-3.0" is much > simpler, it's much clearer to non-lawyers, and referring to it as its own > name matches historical practice. > > In *practice* the LGPL is practically always referred to as its own license, > not as a tweak to another license. Historically the LGPL was implemented as > a separate license, and the “tweak” is not a small one either (exceptions are > usually small). All other license list systems (such as Debian and Fedora's) > treat it as a separate license, so there is strong historical precedence to > treating it as its own license (if no other reason than backwards > compatibility). > > --- David A. Wheeler > _______________________________________________ Spdx-legal mailing list Spdx-legal@lists.spdx.org https://lists.spdx.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx-legal
