On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 09:20:39AM -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
"AT" == Axel Thimm Axel.Thimm@ATrpms.net writes:
AT> Also since there is a distinction of GPL<=2 and GPL3, the LGPL AT> should also deserve its own license tag.
Of course it does; is there anything that doesn't use a tag of "LGPL" to indicate the LGPL?
Does your statement indicate that you think something should be changed about the draft? I haven't yet presented a list of licenses that should receive standardized tags.
OK, I thought the list of the 8 licenses beneath the "plan" heading was already what you were suggesting as a set, sorry for the noise. :)