[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-community
Subject:    Re: [kde-community] licence policy updates
From:       Laszlo Papp <lpapp () kde ! org>
Date:       2014-02-14 16:14:54
Message-ID: CAOMwXhO_Yj8t0tsWOzaHrNMFXo8AzL7OSupnJwyF2FwA+dmbxw () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 4:09 PM, Sebastian K=FCgler <sebas@kde.org> wrote:
> On Friday, February 14, 2014 16:02:03 Laszlo Papp wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Jonathan Riddell <jr@jriddell.org> wro=
te:
>> > I've made some proposed changes to the KDE Licensing Policy
>> >
>> > http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/Licensing_Policy/Draft
>> >
>> > Most significant is the inclusion of GPL 3+ as an option in response
>> > to a request by GCompris and a desire voiced by a few people not to
>> > treat it as an exception.
>> >
>> > Our current policy is designed to allow maxium code reuse around KDE
>> > and beyond, allowing GPL 3+ would mean some code could not be reused
>> > in GPL 2+ code without a relicence, but as pointed out this problem
>> > already happens when moving GPL 2 code to platform.  The policy has
>> > nothing to do with whether GPL 2 or 3 is more or less commercially
>> > acceptable.  Given a blank sheet I'd pick GPL 3 every time as it
>> > prevents DRM lock-in and patent abuse.
>>
>> Would it be possible to incorporate this important information in some
>> way into the infrastructure? I think it would be useful when deciding
>> about licenses. I believe the more we can do for aiding the selection
>> for our developers, the better.
>
> Isn't this what the commit hooks already do?

As far as I know, they might warn, but will not indicate the
difference e.g. between GPLv2 and GPLv3.
_______________________________________________
kde-community mailing list
kde-community@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]