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

List:       kde-community
Subject:    Re: [kde-community] Licensing question with header-only libraries
From:       Albert Astals Cid <aacid () kde ! org>
Date:       2016-01-24 11:43:51
Message-ID: 4620921.YrnyCdePxs () xps
[Download RAW message or body]

El Sunday 24 January 2016, a les 10:15:37, Ivan Čukić va escriure:
> > I'd go with LGPL+exception. It's effectively the same as GPL+exception in
> > this context but shows the intent of providing a library. If someone ever
> 
> I have never seen a project under LGPL+exception, that is the reason I
> wrote GPL+exception. For me, it is the same, but I agree it would be
> more obvious to the client if 'L' was added.
> 
> Now, the main problem here is that (L)GPL+exception is not on the list
> of approved licenses for our code. :)

Maybe this should be better discussed in https://mail.kde.org/mailman/
listinfo/kde-licensing?

Cheers,
  Albert

> 
> Cheers,
> Ivan
> _______________________________________________
> kde-community mailing list
> kde-community@kde.org
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community

_______________________________________________
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]