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

List:       kde-frameworks-devel
Subject:    Re: KItemModels, Solid & KJS licenses
From:       George Staikos <staikos () kde ! org>
Date:       2014-03-03 21:30:25
Message-ID: CAFKiAGBWQxdEZ9iurQrXtOd+ZAWJdhnFeQVFT5QMZPs+ym_wGQ () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/alternative)]


I'm ok with lgpl.
 On Mar 3, 2014 4:29 PM, "=C5=A1umski" <hrvoje.senjan@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday 03 of March 2014 16:20:20 George Staikos wrote:
> > What license are you asking for? Sorry I haven't read the back info and
> > don't feel like digging. :)
> >
>
> Quote:
> "kwallet-framework-4.96.0/src/runtime/kwalletd/kbetterthankdialog.(cpp|h)
> and
> kwallet-framework-4.96.0/src/runtime/kwalletd/kwalletwizard.(.cpp|.h) are
> both
> GPL-2.0+ licensed. Can you check with upstream if this is known/intended.
> If
> intended, the license should be LGPL-2.1+ and GPL-2.0+ (unless the GPL-2.=
0+
> files are linked with the LGPL-2.1+ files so as that a resulting derived
> work is
> created - which should be GPL-2.0+ licensed)."
>
> Question is now, can those files be relicensed to LGPL-2.1+ ?
>
>
> Cheers,
> Hrvoje

[Attachment #5 (text/html)]

<p dir="ltr">I&#39;m ok with lgpl. <br>
</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mar 3, 2014 4:29 PM, &quot;šumski&quot; &lt;<a \
href="mailto:hrvoje.senjan@gmail.com">hrvoje.senjan@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br \
type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 \
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> On Monday 03 of March 2014 \
16:20:20 George Staikos wrote:<br> &gt; What license are you asking for? Sorry I \
haven&#39;t read the back info and<br> &gt; don&#39;t feel like digging. :)<br>
&gt;<br>
<br>
Quote:<br>
&quot;kwallet-framework-4.96.0/src/runtime/kwalletd/kbetterthankdialog.(cpp|h) \
and<br> kwallet-framework-4.96.0/src/runtime/kwalletd/kwalletwizard.(.cpp|.h) are \
both<br> GPL-2.0+ licensed. Can you check with upstream if this is known/intended. \
If<br> intended, the license should be LGPL-2.1+ and GPL-2.0+ (unless the \
GPL-2.0+<br> files are linked with the LGPL-2.1+ files so as that a resulting derived \
work is<br> created - which should be GPL-2.0+ licensed).&quot;<br>
<br>
Question is now, can those files be relicensed to LGPL-2.1+ ?<br>
<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Hrvoje</blockquote></div>



_______________________________________________
Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list
Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel


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