Closed triallax closed 1 year ago
Well, GPLv3 is one of possible “GPLv2 or later” variants.
Both GPLv2 and GPLv3 are fine, but when deciding which version to put into a LICENSE file, I put the latest version.
But if there is a valid reason to replace file with GPLv2, I will do it.
I don't know if it's incorrect to put GPLv3 in this case, but I can say that it's unusual (I've never seen somebody do this before) and also somewhat confusing.
Furthermore, GitHub detects the project's license from its license file, and thus confusingly show ReText's license as "GPL-3.0."
According to the README and from a quick look at the source code's license headers, ReText is under GPLv2 or later. However, LICENSE_GPL contains the text of the GPLv3. Is this a mistake?