On Tuesday 25 April 2006 13:43, Volker Krause wrote: > > Indeed, but there might be a problem though: kdgantt is licensed similar to > Qt (GPL + commercial license), which is incompatible with the kdelibs > license policy (which we would like to apply for kdepimlibs as well). > > So either kdgantt has to stay out or we need a diffrent/extended license > policy for kdepimlibs. Hm, that's a tough problem. It's the questions how much our LGPL policy is worth. Who would use a LGPL library, but wouldn't use a GPL one? Would these people buy a commercial license of kdgantt? Does this kind of developer even exist? In order to have a clean non-GPL lib module we probably have to leave out kdgantt for now. -- Cornelius Schumacher