[kde-community] licence policy updates

[Andreas Cord-Landwehr]

On Tuesday 18 February 2014 11:48:47 Jonathan Riddell wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 08:34:51PM +0100, Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> > Do you guys think that it would make sense to explicitely suggest that 
> > applications use the "GPL version 2 or version 3 or later versions 
approved by 
> > the membership of KDE e.V. " variant unless they really have special 
needs in 
> > aim to improve inter-app code shareability?
> 
> Added to the draft
> 
> http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/Licensing_Policy/Draft

Hi, I wonder if the refence in #13 should point to Section 4 (instead of 
Section 3). Also the second reference in #13 could directly point to 
Section 5 instead of speaking over "other source files".

On a different topic, I think it would benefit the policy to group #4 to #12 
to a common enumeration point like "Licenses" (or any better wording) and 
indent them by one level. In my opinion, this helps to easier spot where the 
special license requirements for which content type is and ends the mixing 
with general license policy information. That would mean, having the 
license information for the content types
 * source files contained in libraries
 * other source files
 * translations
 * oxygen-icons
 * documentation
 * cmake modules
 * windows installer files
 * standalone media files
 * other data 
on a second indentation level.
Further, putting these content type names into italic would also improve 
readability IMO.

Greetings,
Andreas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-community/attachments/20140313/85370a85/attachment.htm>