[kde-community] licence policy updates

Michael Pyne mpyne at kde.org
Mon Feb 17 02:29:13 UTC 2014

On Mon, February 17, 2014 01:44:29 you wrote:
> On Sunday 16 February 2014 15:25:31 Michael Pyne wrote:
> > 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.
> Why is it not a good license for libraries?

The general idea is that for library code you would want either a weaker 
copyleft license like LGPL or a permissive license like MIT or BSD, so as to 
permit the development of many different kinds of KDE-using applications 
(perhaps even closed-source ones).

 - Michael Pyne

More information about the kde-community mailing list