Closed mrcook closed 3 years ago
Licenses can be a bit confusing, are all the (old) files GPL-3.0-or-later? (Looks like it on the commit that introduced the GPL)
I am fine with licensing my minor contributions under GPL-3.0-or-later rather than GPL-2.0 (since I guess you would need to revert it otherwise? Again, licenses can be a bit confusing..)
I'm fine with that change. Whichever of the two you prefer is okay with me.
The way I see it, I don't have a choice but to change the license. My change was not a valid one, meaning the license was always GPL3 (since 5.6), regardless of what I stated in this repo.
Thanks for responding!
update: @Grimler91 yes, they are all GPL3 or later. I based this repository on the 5.6 release.
All references to the old license have now been replaced and a new version released.
In a careless change back when I first started this project I inadvertently changed the license to GPL-2 from GPL-3.0-or-later.
This needs to be corrected by me.
cc/ @Eli-the-Bearded, @Grimler91, @russell-taylor, @sdicke, @steils