Detect agpl-3.0_326 rule text as agpl-3.0-plus

[aishwary-dongre]

Fixes #5002

Brief description

agpl-3.0_326.RULE grants the AGPL "either version 3 of the Licence, or (at your option) any later version", which is AGPL-3.0-or-later, but it declared license_expression: agpl-3.0. Any file matching this notice was reported as AGPL-3.0-only.

This PR:

• sets the expression to agpl-3.0-plus
• renames the rule to agpl-3.0-plus_311.RULE so the name matches the expression, as in other expression corrections such as 94a4d35. 311 is what find_rule_base_location('agpl-3.0-plus') returns. No code or test fixture refers to the old file name.
• updates replaced_by in the deprecated agpl-3.0_330.RULE from agpl-3.0 to agpl-3.0-plus. That rule is the "license" spelling of the same notice, and it is detected through this one, so its expected detection changes with it. Without this, test_validate_detect_deprecated_agpl_3_0_330_rule fails.

Before / after

Matching the full rule text against a freshly built index:

	rule	expression
develop	agpl-3.0_326.RULE	agpl-3.0
this PR	agpl-3.0-plus_311.RULE	agpl-3.0-plus

About #5001

#5001 reported that the GIMP header app/widgets/gimpdashboard.h matched this rule. On current develop I could not reproduce that. The current upstream file is detected as gpl-3.0-plus via gpl-3.0-plus_60.RULE at 100% coverage, both before and after this change. So this PR fixes the rule named in #5002. I am not claiming it resolves #5001, which may already have been fixed by other rule changes.

Tests

With a license index rebuilt from this branch:

• test_validate_detect_agpl_3_0_plus_311_rule and test_ignorables_in_rule_or_license_agpl_3_0_plus_311_rule pass
• all 2194 AGPL-related tests in test_detection_validate.py pass (--test-suite=validate -k agpl)
• all 1508 deprecated-rule tests pass (-k deprecated). This is the class of test a changed expression can break, which is how I found agpl-3.0_330.
• tests/licensedcode/test_license_models.py: 50 passed

I did not run the full 76k-test validation suite locally, so I am relying on the license_validate_* CI shards for the rest.

Possibly related, out of scope

Two non-deprecated rules are word-for-word variants of this notice and look like the same bug. Their file names even say plus, but they declare agpl-3.0:

• agpl-3.0-plus_4.RULE, the http:// variant of this exact text
• agpl-3.0-plus_6.RULE

I have not changed them because #5002 is about _326 only. Their history is mixed too: agpl-3.0-plus_3 is deprecated with replaced_by: agpl-3.0-plus, while _5 and _7 point at agpl-3.0. So I would rather have a maintainer confirm the intent first. I am happy to include them here or open a follow-up.

AI generation disclosure

I used an AI assistant on this: finding the rule-naming convention in history, building the before/after detection check, running the validation tests, and drafting this description. I reviewed and verified every claim against the repository myself, and I can explain and defend the change. Flagging it since ScanCode states no policy either way.

Tasks

• Reviewed contribution guidelines
• PR is descriptively titled 📑 and links the original issue above 🔗
• Tests pass (see above for what I ran locally and what I left to CI)
• Commits are in uniquely-named feature branch and has no merge conflicts 📁
• Signed off (DCO)
• Updated documentation pages (not applicable)
• Updated CHANGELOG.rst (not applicable, rule data only)