[kde-community] KDE Relicensing Effort

[Marc Mutz]

On Monday 27 July 2015 22:14:05 David Faure wrote:
> On Monday 27 July 2015 15:01:06 Marc Mutz wrote:
> > I meant that I prefer the "or later" clause to be present, not and don't
> > like a relicense to v[23]-only.
> > 
> > No difference atm, only once there's a GPLv4, it will be automatically
> > permitted on v2+, but not on v[23]-only.
> 
> Right, but that's just a preference then, not a refusal for v[23]-only.

Not really. I don't insist on it in code that I have only minor contributions 
to, but I will probably insist on code that's originally by me, or to which I 
otherwise have made large contributions.

> If one of the other contributors to a v2-only file says the opposite
> (v[23] yes, v2+ no), then I would still be able to relicense that file
> to "v2 or v3", since that is allowed by your more permissive "v2+", right?

No. v2+ requires the "or later" clause to be present. v23-only requires it not 
to be present. On is not a subset of the other. They are conflicting, and there 
needs to be arbitration in any given library or app so that the library or app 
as a whole can be relicensed to the same set of licenses.

> Otherwise the file would have to stay v2-only, which surely is worse
> in your book, right?

Sure, it's not what both licenser-holders wished for, but the only non-
conflicting choice.

Thanks,
Marc

-- 
Marc Mutz <marc.mutz at kdab.com> | Senior Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH & Co.KG, a KDAB Group Company
Tel: +49-30-521325470
KDAB - The Qt Experts