El Diumenge, 16 de febrer de 2014, a les 15:25:31, Michael Pyne va escriure: > On Fri, February 14, 2014 10:31:24 Jonathan Riddell wrote: > > I've made some proposed changes to the KDE Licensing Policy > > > > http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/Licensing_Policy/Draft > > > > Most significant is the inclusion of GPL 3+ as an option in response > > to a request by GCompris and a desire voiced by a few people not to > > treat it as an exception. > > I was writing up a short draft guide on how to pick a license which got me > to looking at our current FLA Relicensing Policy (v1.3.1, > http://ev.kde.org/resources/FRP.pdf). > > Although it speaks to relicensing under the FLA process (the FLA form itself > mentions GPL and LGPL without giving versions), it also gives a flat list > of acceptable KDE licenses, split in license groups. AFAICS this is *the* > list of permissible licenses as determined by the e.V. General Assembly, > whether contributors adopt into the FLA or not. > > I noticed that GPLv3 *is* an acceptable license for non-library code, either > GPLv3, GPLv3+, or GPLv3 w/ Qt exceptions. GPLv2 is certainly a valid option > but it does not appear to be mandatory. > > The FRP also lists the Techbase Licensing Policy page as being informative, > not normative (end of §2 on page 2). > > It seems to me that GCompris is already in license compliance and that we > need merely update the Licensing Policy page to conform to the allowed > licenses in the FRP. > > Please let me know if I'm missing something.
Yes, that FRP document is wrong, our real list of accepted licenses is at http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/Licensing_Policy Cheers, Albert > > Regards, > - Michael Pyne > _______________________________________________ > kde-community mailing list > kde-community@kde.org > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community _______________________________________________ kde-community mailing list kde-community@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community