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

List:       kget
Subject:    Re: [Kget] Relicense GPLv2 only files in KGet
From:       "Javier Goday" <jgoday () gmail ! com>
Date:       2007-11-08 18:26:03
Message-ID: aba568fb0711081026o3148abb4m2ab387c21a421efc () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi, i have no problem with changing the licenses, it's ok for me!

Thanks & Bye

On 11/8/07, Urs Wolfer <uwolfer@kde.org> wrote:
> Hi all
>
> I have had a discussion some time ago with Dirk Mueller concerning GPL
> version
> 2 _only_ licensed files. As I know, there is quite a lot of KGet code GPLv2
> only licensed. Almost all (or all?) files initially written by Dario are
> affected.
>
> Why should we do this step? Dirk has explained to me that GPLv2 only is no
> problem in the current situation. But what happens when Qt will be released
> unter GPLv3 only? Or any other lib we link against? There would be legal
> issues... At the moment, many people are relicensing their code in KDE SVN.
>
> In order to prevent this situation, it would be great if we could relicense
> all these files right now. But: Of course, everybody, who has a copyright on
> such files, needs to agee on this. I don't want to have a look at every
> single file to see who owns the / a copy of it if not necessary now. Would
> be
> great if just everybody who owns a copyright on a file in KGet which is
> GPLv2
> only could reply to this message and clearly state that he agrees on this
> (please on this public mailing list).
>
> People that are for sure affected:
> * Dario Massarin
> * Manolo Valdes
> * Javier Goday
> * Urs Wolfer
>
> If everybody agrees, I would like to relicense GPLv2 only files to GPLv2+.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Bye
> urs
>
_______________________________________________
Kget mailing list
Kget@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kget
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]