[licenses] Qt exception

[Marc Mutz]

On Saturday 01 February 2003 17:06, Waldo Bastian wrote:
> > > KDE library license policy doesn't allow GPL, does it?
> >
> > libkdenetwork is no public library, i.e. no header files are
> > installed. It's only used by some well defined KDE applications to
> > share some code. So does this policy really apply to this library?
>
> http://developer.kde.org/documentation/licensing/policy.html states:
>
> "3) Source files that are part of a library in kdelibs must be
> licensed under the terms of any of the following licenses:
>
>   *) LGPL as listed in kdelibs/COPYING.LIB
>   *) BSD license as listed below.
>   *) X11 license as listed below."
>
> As worded above it doesn't apply to libs outside kdelibs.

"Worse", libkdenetwork already sort-of depends on cryptplug, which is 
GPL'd and which depends on gpgme, which is also GPL'd. Even more 
"worse": I expect the cryptplug wrapping of gpgme to go away in the 3.2 
timeframe, since it's really essential KMail functionality. That means 
that libkdenetwork links to gpgme, which is GPL'd. So libkdenetwork 
must be GPL'd.

Actually, I assert the LGPL-in-kdelibs requirement impairs encryption 
support adoption in KDE programs, b/c we can't write a "kgpgme" and put 
it into kdelibs and no-one is using x509 for office documents anyway.

Marc,
dreaming of an --enable-gpl-code switch for kdelibs configure so some 
non-essential code could be under GPL. ;-)

-- 
History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of
urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.
                                  -- Justice Thurgood Marshall, 1989
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: signature
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-core-devel/attachments/20030201/7ff1d740/attachment.sig>