BSD 3 Clause?

[Lukas Sommer]

Hello everyone.

I have a question about BSD-3-Clause.
https://community.kde.org/Policies/Licensing_Policy says:

> BSD-2-Clause: BSD License as listed below.
> Ensure that the BSD license does not contain the so called 'advertisement
clause' or terms similar to Facebook's Additional Grant of Patent Rights.

And:

> 13. CMake code must be licenced under the BSD licence listed below

And:

> BSD-2-Clause
>
> SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause
> SPDX-FileCopyrightText:   
>
> A third requirement is sometimes included: BSD-3-Clause
>
> The advertising clause requiring mention in adverts must never be
included. The Facebook patent grant must never be included.

Now does this mean that BSD-3-Clause may be used instead of BSD-2-Clause
for CMake code or that it must not be used? Can we clarify the wiki page?

Best regards

Lukas Sommer

Re: Help get KDE apps into Hungarian education

[Johnny Jazeix]

Hi Áron,
great to hear!
Is GCompris already in the list for schools? It has Hungarian translation
completed at every version (we plan a v3.0 for mid-January).
There are software like kalzium in https://invent.kde.org/education/, even
if the translation is not fully completed in Hungarian (maybe the FSF.hu
can help regarding the missing translation if they have people interested).

Cheers,

Johnny

Le mar. 20 déc. 2022 à 18:02, Kovács Áron  a écrit :

> Hi everyone,
>
> Earlier this year I contacted FSF.hu - the foundation creating a custom
> Ubuntu version which Hungarian schools and students taking the Érettségi
> (our equivalent to a matura/bac/abitur) can use - about potentially
> including Krita and Kate in the software catalogue, since these 2 can help
> solve the exercises.
>
> The person responsible for the image supports the idea and responded with:
> (please excuse any translation errors)
>
> *"Once a year (in August) we have the opportunity to submit a new image to
> the Office of Education, which can be added to the official software list
> after editorial approval. I will try to write this up so that it is not
> left out of the next version next June/July! Recommendations beyond that
> [Krita and Kate] are welcome! Packages that are not required for the exam
> but useful for daily learning may be included, this is also supported by
> our editor, he only tests the packages on the software list. At the same
> time, we don't want to overstep the mark, it's a delicate line, but we are
> happy to include up-and-coming, stable new releases...  Best regards: Péter
> Gödöny "unofficial" Ubuntu activist"*
>
> Our goal is to promote KDE software in education. *Including something in
> this "OS" makes it possible for students to use it for the exam, thereby
> more likely that teachers choose to teach them.* Kids learning some KDE
> stuff would be certainly useful for the Community in the long term.
>
> So, I'd like to ask for opinions (of educators and everyone):
>
> *What KDE apps useful in everyday learning would you recommend
> recommending to FSF.hu? *It's a plus if they are very stable and have
> good Hungarian translations.
>
> You can try last year's Ubuntu Érettségi ReMix image here
> 
>  (you
> have to guess the URL currently, but let's hope that changes) and find an
> example of our Érettségi exam here
> 
> .
>
> Thanks and happy holidays in advance.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Áron Kovács
>

Help get KDE apps into Hungarian education

[Kovács Áron]

Hi everyone,
Earlier this year I contacted FSF.hu - the foundation creating a custom Ubuntu 
version which Hungarian schools and students taking the Érettségi (our 
equivalent 
to a matura/bac/abitur) can use - about potentially including Krita and Kate in 
the 
software catalogue, since these 2 can help solve the exercises. 
The person responsible for the image supports the idea and responded with: 
(please 
excuse any translation errors)
/"Once a year (in August) we have the opportunity to submit a new image to the 
Office of Education, which can be added to the official software list after 
editorial 
approval. I will try to write this up so that it is not left out of the next 
version next 
June/July! Recommendations beyond that [Krita and Kate] are welcome! Packages 
that are not required for the exam but useful for daily learning may be 
included, this 
is also supported by our editor, he only tests the packages on the software 
list. At the 
same time, we don't want to overstep the mark, it's a delicate line, but we are 
happy 
to include up-and-coming, stable new releases...  Best regards: Péter Gödöny 
"unofficial" Ubuntu activist"/

Our goal is to promote KDE software in education. *Including something in this 
"OS" 
makes it possible for students to use it for the exam, thereby more likely that 
teachers choose to teach them.* Kids learning some KDE stuff would be certainly 
useful for the Community in the long term. 
So, I'd like to ask for opinions (of educators and everyone):
*What KDE apps useful in everyday learning would you recommend recommending 
to FSF.hu? *It's a plus if they are very stable and have good Hungarian 
translations.
You can try last year's Ubuntu Érettségi ReMix image here[1] (you have to guess 
the 
URL currently, but let's hope that changes) and find an example of our 
Érettségi 
exam here[2].

Thanks and happy holidays in advance.

Best wishes,
Áron Kovács


[1] 
https://dload-oktatas.educatio.hu/erettsegi/programok2021/ubuntuReMix-20.04-desktop64.iso
[2] https://dload-oktatas.educatio.hu/erettsegi/feladatok_2022tavasz_emelt/
e_infang_22maj_fl.pdf

Re: Does KDE have a policy for shipping libraries licensed under the Apache license?

[Volker Krause]

On Dienstag, 20. Dezember 2022 05:41:11 CET Nicolás Alvarez wrote:
> (This is "as I understand it", not legal advice, I am not a lawyer, etc etc)
> 
> The system library clause is, for example, what lets KDE Connect (under the
> GPL) link to the iOS system frameworks (under a proprietary license).
> 
> System libraries have nothing to do with the Apache situation. GPLv2 and
> Apachev2 are incompatible due to the details of the patent termination
> terms, while GPLv3 and Apachev2 are compatible, with no need to invoke the
> system library clause. See
> https://www.apache.org/licenses/GPL-compatibility.html
> 
> A project under the GPLv3 can incorporate files under the Apache2 license,
> and the combined work, like the compiled binary, will be considered to be
> under the GPLv3. You have to be very careful during development to not copy
> code from the GPLv3 files to the Apache2 files (the copyright holder would
> need to explicitly consent to relicensing that code to Apache2) or
> viceversa (copying Apache2 code into GPLv3 files would need to preserve the
> original copyright/license/warranty notices).
> 
> A project under the GPLv3 can also link to a library under Apachev2, and
> then things are even easier since you don't have to worry about pieces of
> code getting copied between files (the library source code is not in your
> project and you won't be modifying it).
> 
> I found more info here (especially about the complications in the
> non-library case):
> https://softwarefreedom.org/resources/2007/gpl-non-gpl-collaboration.html

That matches my understanding as well, and with OpenSSL moving to Apache 2 
this is something eventually affecting the distribution of large parts of our 
work, not just KDE Connect. 

The licensing policy doesn't allow GPL-2.0-only code anymore for that reason 
(compatibility with Apache 2), which is as close as we get to an existing 
policy on the original question I think.

> Note that the GPLv3 has the famous "anti-tivoization" clause (not present in
> GPLv2) which requires, in some cases, distributing signing keys that let
> you run the modified software, and this seems like it would clash with the
> App Store. However, it is my understanding that this does *not* apply to
> App Stores. It only applies when the software is shipped with a hardware
> device and distributed along with the sale of the device. (The messy
> wording in the GPLv3 is to avoid "but we're not really *selling* it"
> loopholes). Apple can't put GPLv3 code in iOS itself, but third party apps
> should be fine.

I don't think that applies here, as signing is not meant to prevent you from 
running modified versions of our code, it merely proves that you are running 
our binaries. You can build (and sign) your own APK and run that without 
limitations, this isn't any different from e.g. Linux distro packages being 
signed as well.

Regards,
Volker

> Also, while you may want to say somewhere "KDE Connect for iOS is licensed
> under the GPLv3", the individual source code files (at least those not
> directly interacting with this library) can keep saying GPLv2/v3/eV. That
> would let us copy code into other KDE projects without having to ask people
> for relicensing just to add v2 again.
> > El 20 dic. 2022, a la(s) 00:47, Simon Redman 
> > escribió:
> >  Hi Andrius,
> > 
> > Thanks for your input.
> > 
> > That is the textbook answer, but doesn't actually fit this case. GPLv3 is
> > only compatible with Apache because it has an exclusion for system
> > libraries, but KDE Connect is an Android app so there is no concept of
> > system libraries.
> > 
> > It doesn't get to the core of the issue: What is KDE's position?
> > 
> > To take another angle:
> > If I assume the whole package falls under the "entire work", and if I
> > package Apache v2 and my own GPL v2 code together, and distribute it, I'd
> > have broken the GPLv2 license of my own code because I cannot relicence
> > the Apache parts of the "whole work", but I'm not going to sue myself so
> > there is no legal issue.
> > 
> > The simple example gets complicated when it's a global organization, and
> > not just my code but the code of other contributors as well. But that's
> > why I'm asking if there's a defined policy.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Simon
> > 
> > On December 19, 2022 5:54:38 PM EST, "Andrius Štikonas"  
wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> 
> >> Quick check seems to indicate that KDE Connect license is:
> >> 
> >> GPL-2.0-only OR GPL-3.0-only OR LicenseRef-KDE-Accepted-GPL
> >> Apache v2 licensed code is not compatible with GPL-2.0-only but
> >> is compatible with GPLv3. So by combining KDE Conenct with
> >> that library you lose right to redistribute the whole thing
> >> as GPL2 but you still have the right to redistribute combined code under
> >> 
> >> GPL-3.0-only OR LicenseRef-KDE-Accepted-GPL
> >> I.e. you are essentially dropping GPLv2 support and only keeping GPLv3.
> >> So you must first check that you have no GPLv2 only dependencies.
> >> 
> >>