[Fedora-legal-list] License short name: LGPLv2 or LGPLv2.1?

[Tom "spot" Callaway]

On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 12:15 -0400, Michel Salim wrote:
> There is no release of LGPLv2, so the short names for LGPL listed on
> the Licensing page are a bit unclear.
> 
> Would it be better to use LGPLv2.1, LGPLv2.1+ etc. as opposed to
> LGPLv2 et. al.? It seems odd to refer to a non-existent license.

There was an LGPLv2. It was called the "GNU Library General Public
License":

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/library.html

It has been succeeded by the GNU Lesser General Public License, which
came out at v2.1, and is effectively the same with regards to
rights/restrictions. 

For simplicity, we just use LGPLv2 to cover both the Lesser and Library
versions of the LGPL.

~spot