LGPL for Breeze QStyle and qtquickcontrols?

[Martin Graesslin]

On Saturday, May 28, 2016 11:24:52 PM CEST Michael Pyne wrote:
> 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.

heh, that's certainly not the case here. This is not trying to force our style 
to be only used in Plasma. That would be a ridiculous stance from my side.

I want to have my code stay GPL. I don't think that the breeze code needs to 
be licenced in a way that it can be copied into 3rd party applications. That's 
all. It has nothing to do with enforcing anything, it's just about the actual 
implementation should stay GPL in my opinion.

Cheers
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 181 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-frameworks-devel/attachments/20160530/1ce1b5a9/attachment-0001.sig>