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

List:       kde-kimageshop
Subject:    Re: Relicensing Krita as LGPLv2+
From:       Dmitry Kazakov <dimula73 () gmail ! com>
Date:       2017-01-05 9:58:10
Message-ID: CAEkBSfWg8Jmm70ayT62ahN79R_EoNkZ-=Jcn4Xw3EzoiMXEPZA () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi, Boud!

From my side, I fully support relicensing Krita into LGPL. It will solve
really a lot of problems for us.

So I'm ok if you change the license of all my code since 2009 to LGPL.

On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 12:13 PM, Boudewijn Rempt <boud@valdyas.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Umpteenth draft of this mail, but I think we should consider relicensing
> the GPL code in Krita to LGPL.
>
> One reason is that now that Krita is on its own, the mix of LGPL library
> code inherited from koffice/calligra and GPL library code inherited from
> Krita makes it hard to move code around; like we just did in the svg
> branch, creating the kritacommand library from code from krita/image
> and libs/kundo2. That code needs to be relicensed to LGPL before we
> merge the branch, of course.
>
> Another reason is that there are too many macOS users who get confused
> when they install an application that's not in the app store, and we
> cannot publish GPL software in the app store. I wish I could just shrug
> that off, and I've done that until 3.1, but it's getting quite a
> support burden.
>
> I haven't found a script yet that will figure out who owns copyright
> on the original GPL'ed krita code only -- running things like git fame
> only works on the whole repo, most of which is LGPL already...
>
> --
> Boudewijn Rempt | http://www.krita.org, http://www.valdyas.org
>



-- 
Dmitry Kazakov

[Attachment #3 (text/html)]

<div dir="ltr"><div>Hi, Boud!<br><br></div>From my side, I fully support relicensing \
Krita into LGPL. It will solve really a lot of problems for us. <br><br>So I&#39;m ok \
if you change the license of all my code since 2009 to LGPL.<br></div><div \
class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 12:13 PM, \
Boudewijn Rempt <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:boud@valdyas.org" \
target="_blank">boud@valdyas.org</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote \
class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc \
solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br> <br>
Umpteenth draft of this mail, but I think we should consider relicensing<br>
the GPL code in Krita to LGPL.<br>
<br>
One reason is that now that Krita is on its own, the mix of LGPL library<br>
code inherited from koffice/calligra and GPL library code inherited from<br>
Krita makes it hard to move code around; like we just did in the svg<br>
branch, creating the kritacommand library from code from krita/image<br>
and libs/kundo2. That code needs to be relicensed to LGPL before we<br>
merge the branch, of course.<br>
<br>
Another reason is that there are too many macOS users who get confused<br>
when they install an application that&#39;s not in the app store, and we<br>
cannot publish GPL software in the app store. I wish I could just shrug<br>
that off, and I&#39;ve done that until 3.1, but it&#39;s getting quite a<br>
support burden.<br>
<br>
I haven&#39;t found a script yet that will figure out who owns copyright<br>
on the original GPL&#39;ed krita code only -- running things like git fame<br>
only works on the whole repo, most of which is LGPL already...<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
Boudewijn Rempt | <a href="http://www.krita.org" rel="noreferrer" \
target="_blank">http://www.krita.org</a>, <a href="http://www.valdyas.org" \
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.valdyas.org</a><br> \
</font></span></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div \
class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">Dmitry Kazakov</div> </div>



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