1. 01 Oct, 2019 1 commit
    • Thomas Haller's avatar
      CONTRIBUTING: update comment about requiring LGPL-2.1+ license instead of LGPL-2.0+ · 3c362317
      Thomas Haller authored
      Historically, libnm claimed to be LGPL-2.0+ licensed. But as keep mixing that
      with LGPL-2.1+ code (e.g. from systemd), so probably even the parts that
      claimed to be LGPL-2.0+, were not entirely correctly doing so.
      
      Anyway, since we switched to SPDX license identifiers, we now claim
      everywhere that the right license is LGPL-2.1+. Update the comment to
      reflect that.
      3c362317
  2. 30 Sep, 2019 18 commits
  3. 27 Sep, 2019 14 commits
  4. 26 Sep, 2019 7 commits