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

List:       kwrite-devel
Subject:    Re: Kate Licensing
From:       Matthew Woehlke <mw_triad () users ! sourceforge ! net>
Date:       2007-11-08 21:26:05
Message-ID: fgvute$se6$1 () ger ! gmane ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

Christoph Cullmann wrote:
> Am Donnerstag 08 November 2007 21:45:00 schrieb Matthew Woehlke:
>> Christoph Cullmann wrote:
>>> Kate's current license is the LGPL2. Would there be a possiblity to
>>> relicense it under 2 + 3?
>>>
>>> We did stay away from 2+ to have control about the licensing, would 2+3
>>> be ok? No change will be made until the authors of the files ack this
>>> idea.
>> What about allowing e.V. to act as proxy to relicense to LGPL > v3?
> Not sure about that. I would have no big problems with that, but question is, 
> if that is really needed. What do other devs think about this?

In my humble and not-a-lawyer unqualified :-) opinion, it would save us 
from having to get all author's permissions when/if (L)GPLv4 (or I 
suppose v3.1, even) comes out.

>> Are we talking about just big-K-Kate, or Kate+katepart+kwrite?
> Yes.

Ok. In that case, for all of my code (heh, which I really need to label 
one of these days :P - I think my only significant contributions are to 
katepart), you have my blessing to use any combination of 2, 3, 2+, 3+ 
or 3+proxy (i.e. as above)... though my personal preference would be 
"v3, or later as approved by e.V." :-) (alas, but for Qt...).

-- 
Matthew
Do you know where your towel is?

_______________________________________________
KWrite-Devel mailing list
KWrite-Devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kwrite-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]