--- Comment #4 from Richard <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com> 2012-01-24 20:54:34 CET ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> Can you show me what/where in the source made you decide that
the license was
> LGPLv2+? I couldn't find any meaningful occurence of "or later".
Ah, was confused myself. Most source files do still contain the word "either"
which threw me off, but it looks like "or later..." was removed, so it
clear cut to me at that moment. We could presume the author(s) intentionally
removed the "or later..." bit from standard notice  but forgot to correct
the sentence for grammar? Maybe I should contact the upstream to clarify/fix
this as well?
I've put it as "LGPLv2 with exceptions" for now.
I would check with the author on what his intentions were but even if he tells
you it's LGPLv2 (or later), he still needs to make sure the license and header
files reflect this properly. Although he may be stuck with the verbage since
this is effectivly a "fork" of the original, right?
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.