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

List:       kde-pim
Subject:    Re: [Kde-pim] Licsensing in kdepim
From:       Daniel Molkentin <daniel () molkentin ! de>
Date:       2004-07-31 0:48:06
Message-ID: 200407310248.07720.daniel () molkentin ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

[Attachment #2 (multipart/signed)]


On Saturday 31 July 2004 01:56, Ingo Klöcker wrote:
>On Friday 30 July 2004 12:25, Daniel Molkentin wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> the following files are GPL, but should be LGPL, since they reside in
>> libkdepim. Please change the license of the file.
>
>I'm curious. Why should they be LGPL? What's the advantage of using this
>license?

Because it's a lib? Seriously: Some time ago we agreed on keeping libkdepim 
LGPL. Some time ago somebody else (I belive it was adriaan) did the same.
The problem is: as soon as one class is not LGPL, the whole lib isn't.

The idea has two scenario:

1. (more likely): the class is found to be useful and moves to kdelibs => 
needs to be lgpl, so it's better it gets the lgpl status before a thousand 
people start to hack on it under other terms.

2 (less likely): libkdepim gets stable and e.g. commerical developers want to 
use it for KDE PIM addon products. Libs need to be LGPL, too.

Cheers,
  Daniel

[Attachment #5 (application/pgp-signature)]

_______________________________________________
kde-pim mailing list
kde-pim@mail.kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-pim
kde-pim home page at http://pim.kde.org/

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