On Wednesday 27 January 2010 15:59:32 Stefan Majewsky wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 27. Januar 2010 12:33:14 schrieb Dan Leinir Turthra Jensen:
> > Currently, the Gluon codebase contains a number of different licenses,
> >
> > some of which i understand are incompatible with the KDE license policy.
> > As such, a few of us decided (spurred on by troy) to launch this little
> > discussion about the issue.
>
> Could you please give an overview which licenses are currently used?
i do not have the full overview to hand, and the codebase is rather large,
but i know that there is currently in use at least the following:
* GPLv2 (Creator)
* GPLv3 (GluonCore)
* No license at all (some of the files lack license information entirely)
As i understand it, specifically GPLv3 is a big problem since it's
incompatible with KDE's library policy.
> > P.S.: The issue here does not include that of games created using Gluon
> > Creator: The reason for this is that they are irrelevant to this, since
> > they are content, and as such licensed independently.
>
> The license choice for Gluon _can_ limit the license choice for apps using
> Gluon. For example, GPL libraries may only be linked by GPL applications,
> while LGPL libraries allow any license for linking applications.
For this bit to make sense, i should probably need to explain what i meant:
Games created using Gluon Creator are not binaries, but rather a collection of
assets (some of which are scripts defining game logic). What this means is
that they are more a kind of document - so for licensing purposes you're
looking at something much closer to an odf file (which is similarly an archive
with some assets in it, making up a document) rather than a program.
You are of course correct that the license of the Gluon libraries /will/
impact on games like Blok, which do not use Gluon Creator's method of game
creation, and that's really why this discussion needs to happen :)
--
..Dan // Leinir..
http://leinir.dk/
Co-
existence
or no
existence
- Piet Hein