I'm normally really cautious about such changes but yes since 2.0 doesn't 
exist I'd say it's a no-brainer  that it's just a typo. I for one might have 
made that typo many times myself

so please go ahead

 On Sunday 04 January 2015 19:18:10 Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> On Sun, 4 Jan 2015, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
> > can it be assumed (and should we) that all contributors actually agreed to
> > the "2.1" version of the "Lesser" given there is no "2" version?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > Especially as at least all files I checked also contain "or (at your
> > option) any later version.", where "2.1" would be a theoretical later
> > version of "2"?
> > 
> > To be on the really safe side I guess one would need to get all
> > contributors explicitely agree to the correct version. But pragmatically
> > I would just assume people very much were in agreement with 2.1, and this
> > can be considered just a typo.
> > 
> > So would anyone strongly advise against simply applying a patch to all
> > those license headers and change the "2" to "2.1"?
> 
> Not me.
> 
> Boud
> _______________________________________________
> calligra-devel mailing list
> calligra-devel@kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/calligra-
_______________________________________________
calligra-devel mailing list
calligra-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/calligra-devel