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