<div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">My opinion on licenses is that they are a pain in the ass. Consistent<br>licensing was actually one of Shuttleworth's 13 points. I think
<br>consistency with the rest of software world is more important then v2<br>vs. v3 probably. So... wait and see what others do.</blockquote><div><br><br>If all people wait for the others to go to v3..<br><br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
I would be for a statement like "v2 or a later version as determined<br>by the KDE e.V. foundation." I've been licensing my code v2 since I<br>don't trust the FSF enough to do v2+.</blockquote><div><br><br>
Rather than doing that, I would either try to decide within the Amarok<br>project or to decide for KDE as a whole.<br><br>Personally, I prefer v3, but then, I am not an Amarok developer so my<br>opinion should not count all that much :)
<br><br><br>Richard</div></div>