Fix license name and url in pom.xml (LGPL-2.1-only)#12
Merged
MikeTaylor merged 1 commit intoindexdata:masterfrom Nov 14, 2022
Merged
Fix license name and url in pom.xml (LGPL-2.1-only)#12MikeTaylor merged 1 commit intoindexdata:masterfrom
MikeTaylor merged 1 commit intoindexdata:masterfrom
Conversation
The license entry in pom.xml has `<name>LGPL</name>`. This is ambiguous because there are several LGPL versions. The README.md says "version 2.1 of the LGPL" so this should be changed to LGPL-2.1-only, the identifier suggested by https://spdx.org/licenses/ Only the entry in pom.xml is machine-readable, the README isn't, to help tools reading from pom.xml the change should be made. The license entry in pom.xml contains `<url>http://www.indexdata.com/licences/lgpl</url>`. That URL redirects to https://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-3.0.en.html To match the README it is changed to `<url>https://spdx.org/licenses/LGPL-2.1-only.html</url>`. Note: There also exists LGPL-2.1-or-later, the default suggested on https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1-standalone.html Regarding my contributions to cql-java: I agree if cql-java is changed to LGPL-2.1-or-later.
MikeTaylor
approved these changes
Nov 9, 2022
Contributor
MikeTaylor
left a comment
MikeTaylor
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for sorting this out.
I would be happy to use either 2.1-only or 2.1-or-later, as you prefer.
Contributor
Author
|
@MikeTaylor Thanks, please merge and release, I don't have write permissions for this repository. |
Contributor
|
I have merged. I have never done a release of this, though, or any other Java library, so I don't know what that entails. Do you have the necessary permissions to do it? |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The license entry in pom.xml has
<name>LGPL</name>. This is ambiguous because there are several LGPL versions.The README.md says "version 2.1 of the LGPL" so this should be changed to LGPL-2.1-only, the identifier suggested by https://spdx.org/licenses/
Only the entry in pom.xml is machine-readable, the README isn't, to help tools reading from pom.xml the change should be made.
The license entry in pom.xml contains
<url>http://www.indexdata.com/licences/lgpl</url>.That URL redirects to
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/lgpl-3.0.en.html
To match the README it is changed to
<url>https://spdx.org/licenses/LGPL-2.1-only.html</url>.Note: There also exists LGPL-2.1-or-later, the default suggested on
https://www.gnu.org/licenses/old-licenses/lgpl-2.1-standalone.html
Regarding my contributions to cql-java:
I agree if cql-java is changed to LGPL-2.1-or-later.