Correction of SPDX license identifier examples
The more common LGPL version number is 2.1 not 2.0, this is a minor mistake I made and should be corrected now.pull/1011/head
parent
7b3ce479cd
commit
e3cbe3fb1e
|
@ -140,8 +140,8 @@ The recommended notation for the most common licenses is (alphabetical):
|
|||
GPL-2.0+
|
||||
GPL-3.0
|
||||
GPL-3.0+
|
||||
LGPL-2.0
|
||||
LGPL-2.0+
|
||||
LGPL-2.1
|
||||
LGPL-2.1+
|
||||
LGPL-3.0
|
||||
LGPL-3.0+
|
||||
MIT
|
||||
|
@ -163,7 +163,7 @@ An Example for disjunctive licenses:
|
|||
|
||||
{
|
||||
"license": [
|
||||
"LGPL-2.0",
|
||||
"LGPL-2.1",
|
||||
"GPL-3.0+"
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ An Example for disjunctive licenses:
|
|||
Alternatively they can be separated with "or" and enclosed in parenthesis;
|
||||
|
||||
{
|
||||
"license": "(LGPL-2.0 or GPL-3.0+)"
|
||||
"license": "(LGPL-2.1 or GPL-3.0+)"
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
Similarly when multiple licenses need to be applied ("conjunctive license"),
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue