[Kde-hardware-devel] HUPnP and libsolid Licenses - Would be it a problem?

[Kevin Ottens]

On Thursday 20 May 2010 22:26:38 Armijn Hemel wrote:
> hi,
> 
> > Since HUPnP is distributed under a GPLv3 license and libsolid (and
> > Qt/KDE as well) is LGPL, this license "incompatibility" wouldn't be a
> > problem for us? I'm not a license expert, but AFAIK, if a given
> > library made under LGPL uses another library distributed under GPL
> > this makes the first (in our case Solid library) to become GPL, right?
> 
> No.
> 
> >  Assuming that it's not a desired consequence, could Tuomo change
> > 
> > HUPnP license to LGPL?
> 
> Sigh. Step away from the keyboard *NOW* before any of you makes a big
> (licensing) mistake.

Would be nice if you avoid being condescending there. Paulo is obviously 
trying to check if there's a potential problem and licensing issue that we 
could regret later if libsolid depends on HUPnP library.

Obviously, I'm not providing any input to the discussion here, I just wanted 
to point out that's the kind of tone I'd prefer not see on this list.

Please keep this place friendly. Thanks in advance.

Regards.
-- 
Kévin Ottens, http://ervin.ipsquad.net

KDAB - proud patron of KDE, http://www.kdab.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-hardware-devel/attachments/20100521/9b3ab0e2/attachment.sig