Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with agpl
Search options not deleted
user 36725
6
votes
2
answers
1k
views
Does ambigous license without a version refer to most recent? Is 'AGPL' currently equivalent...
SPDX has four recognized short forms for AGPL that are all non-ambigous (https://spdx.org/licenses/): AGPL-1.0-only, AGPL-1.0-or-later, AGPL-3.0-only, AGPL-3.0-or-later. … Is it reasonable to consider it AGPL version 3.0 only, or AGPL version 3.0 or later? …
- 169