GitHub now has a feature where the license in a repo can be identified and a human-readable summary can be displayed. You can preview how it looks in my fork.
To get GitHub to acknowledge the license, I moved it to the root directory, but GitHub wouldn't recognize it as the LGPL. It seems LGPL v2.0 is not as popular as v2.1 or v3.0.
This pull request would change the license to LGPL v2.1, which GitHub recognizes. I believe v2.0 and v2.1 are essentially equivalent.
Following the recommendations on gnu.org, I've included the GPL v2.0 license terms in the file "COPYING" and the LGPL v2.1 license terms in the file "COPYING.LESSER".
Requesting approval from @vbigiani for this.
GitHub now has a feature where the license in a repo can be identified and a human-readable summary can be displayed. You can preview how it looks in my fork.
To get GitHub to acknowledge the license, I moved it to the root directory, but GitHub wouldn't recognize it as the LGPL. It seems LGPL v2.0 is not as popular as v2.1 or v3.0.
This pull request would change the license to LGPL v2.1, which GitHub recognizes. I believe v2.0 and v2.1 are essentially equivalent.
Following the recommendations on gnu.org, I've included the GPL v2.0 license terms in the file "COPYING" and the LGPL v2.1 license terms in the file "COPYING.LESSER".