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

List:       kde-core-devel
Subject:    Re: ghostwriter is ready for your review
From:       Megan <megan.conkle () kdemail ! net>
Date:       2022-10-18 8:12:20
Message-ID: e27493bf-8124-fbf4-f0c1-dc8ae44ef1fd () kdemail ! net
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi Christophe,

It appears I made a very serious mistake listing the cmark-gfm license 
as AAL.  Unfortunately, that code's included COPYING file did not 
explicitly list the licenses, and I was guessing it was AAL.  The good 
news is that I was wrong.  It looks like it is BSD 2.  I have pushed an 
update to fix this.  The cmark-gfm COPYING file is under 
3rdparty/cmark-gfm in case you want to verify that I got it right this 
time.  :)

Thank you for catching this issue!

On 10/18/22 00:26, Christophe Giboudeaux wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On jeudi 13 octobre 2022 08:52:26 CEST Megan wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> The /ghostwriter/ Markdown editor has finally hatched from its
>> incubation and is ready for you to review at your convenience.
>>
>> Project repo: https://invent.kde.org/office/ghostwriter
> https://invent.kde.org/office/ghostwriter/-/blob/master/LICENSES/AAL.txt looks
> problematic, not only because it's not listed on https://community.kde.org/
> Policies/Licensing_Policy#Policy:
>
> - Where is this license used?
> - Does the sources comply with the first clause? Except providing the GPG
> signature for the license file, I don't see any other way to ship it "in a
> verifiable form"
>
> - Does ghostwriter comply with the second clause?
> « each time the resulting executable program or a program dependent thereon is
> launched, a prominent display (e.g., splash screen or banner text) of the
> Author's attribution information, which includes:
>
>       (a) Name ("AUTHOR"),
>       (b) Professional identification ("PROFESSIONAL IDENTIFICATION"), and
>       (c) URL ("URL").
> »
>
>
>
>

-- 
Megan Conkle
ghostwriter developer

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