In particular, "GPL-2.0" is a license identifier, and "GPL-2.0+" is *NOT*.
Just a few nitpicks on my previous email: * I realize that "GPL-2.0+" is in the list of "deprecated" license identifiers, so in some sense there is a "GPL-2.0+" license identifier. But I think it's clear what the *intent* is; the deprecated entry is only for legacy use. * I only talked about pre-defined license identifiers with short forms. I realize that there can be licenses not in the list, and those are handled differently.
