GL2PS License

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

Hi.

I'd like to package gl2ps (http://www.geuz.org/gl2ps/) which is dual-licensed
under GPLv2+ and GL2PSv2+ (http://www.geuz.org/gl2ps/COPYING.GL2PS). May I use
the following License: tag in the spec file?

License: LGPLv2+ or GLS2PSv2+

Regards,
R.

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Friday, 13 June 2008 at 12:55, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I'd like to package gl2ps (http://www.geuz.org/gl2ps/) which is dual-licensed
> under GPLv2+ and GL2PSv2+ (http://www.geuz.org/gl2ps/COPYING.GL2PS). May I use

I meant LGPLv2+.
> the following License: tag in the spec file?
>
> License: LGPLv2+ or GLS2PSv2+

Typo. Make it:
License: LGPLv2+ or GL2PSLv2+

Regards,
R.

[Tom Callaway]

On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 12:55 +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I'd like to package gl2ps (http://www.geuz.org/gl2ps/) which is dual-licensed
> under GPLv2+ and GL2PSv2+ (http://www.geuz.org/gl2ps/COPYING.GL2PS). May I use
> the following License: tag in the spec file?
>
> License: LGPLv2+ or GLS2PSv2+

So... no. :) The GL2PS license is Free & GPL Compatible, and I've added
it to the Good License List as "GL2PS". Even though it specifies a
version (and in reference, uses "or later" language), as far as I can
tell, only one version of the license exists. If another version exists,
we can amend it at that time. Also, is it dual licensed GPLv2+ or 
LGPLv2+? Assuming LGPLv2+ is correct, it should be:

License: LGPLv2+ or GL2PS

We really only specify version when there are notable differences in
rights or compatibility between different versions of the same license.

Thanks,

~spot

[Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski]

On Friday, 13 June 2008 at 13:17, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
[...]
> Assuming LGPLv2+ is correct, it should be:
>
> License: LGPLv2+ or GL2PS

Done, thanks.

Regards,
R.