LGPL for Breeze QStyle and qtquickcontrols?
Michael Pyne
mpyne at kde.org
Sun May 29 03:24:52 UTC 2016
On Sat, May 28, 2016 14:53:54 Jaroslaw Staniek wrote:
> All in all, If nobody just noted an issue with the licensing above maybe
> nobody tried to place/distribute a non-GPL software on top of Plasma? That
> would be the worst news of all to me.
>
> Please speak up someone else because it's a matter of KDE, not just a
> single desktop shell. Maybe some voting fits here.
I've only been able to keep track of the margins of the thread but I will
admit that it seems surprising that we would use code licensing as a means to
either enforce the exclusiveness of Plasma's artwork above and beyond the
existing license for the artwork, or to prevent applications running on KDE
frameworks (but outside of Plasma) from supplying an alternative KDE-authored
QStyle.
On the other hand the major reason we would have needed a KStyle to have a
license exemption in previous KDE desktop shells was so that third-party apps
could better integrate into our desktop, not because we wanted applications to
clone our style and use it outside of our desktop. So the extent that the
plugin mechanism being discussed still allows apps to integrate into Plasma,
it sounds to me like it's at least still doing what we'd expect, at least
within our own shell.
Either way, we seem to have settled on the idea of Qt being wholly responsible
for integration ties into the desktop shell (whether that's Plasma, Windows,
something else), and for that integration by Qt to settle on a style. That
approach is consistent with Breeze-the-style being part of Plasma instead of
an upstream tier. Whether that's always the ideal approach to take is perhaps
a different question, but I don't intend to open it here.
Regards,
- Michael Pyne
More information about the Kde-frameworks-devel
mailing list