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

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: Common Public License (CPL)
From:       Thiago Macieira <thiago () kde ! org>
Date:       2006-03-04 11:12:30
Message-ID: 200603041212.31133.thiago () kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]


George Kraft wrote:
>> I am not a license expert but looking at
>> http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html
>> I see problems, as the CPL license is described as not being
>> compatible with GPL (assuming that we are talking about the same CPL
>> license).
>
>With respect to relative incompatibility, LGPL is incompatible to GPL,
>because GPL libraries force applications to become GPL.  LGPL and CPL
>libraries do not force application licensing.

LGPL isn't incompatible to GPL. However, GPL is incompatible with LGPL.

Don't invert the order because it's significant.

However, all KDE library code must be LGPL-compliant *and* GPL-compatible. 
The reason for that is that the KDE libraries are licensed under the 
union of all the licenses' restrictions: the union must be LGPL. And they 
must be GPL-compatible, since the KDE application code is GPL.

I haven't read the terms of the CPL and I'm not a lawyer, so I'm not 
commenting on whether we're allowed to link to CPL-licensed code or not.

>I'm not asking to mix code with different licenses.  :-)  I'm trying to
>get folks to realize that CPL is another license for header files and
>libraries that be used to build GPL code.

As long as CPL is LGPL and GPL-compliant, it's ok. [I'm not saying it is 
or it isn't]

-- 
  Thiago Macieira  -  thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
    PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
    E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C  966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358

4. And æfter se scieppend ingelogode, he wrát "cenn", ac eala! se 
rihtendgesamnung andswarode "cenn: ne wát hú cennan 'eall'. Ástynt."

[Attachment #3 (application/pgp-signature)]

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