[Kde-pim] License change.

[Thomas McGuire]

Hello,

> Last time I send a mail regarding such a topic I  promised myself to never
> ever try a license change again.
Thanks for not giving up. Cleaning up the library situation in KDEPIM is 
important.

> We are now faced with stalled development and frustration. In particular
> kpimidentities has the interest of both Mailody and for example Kopete.
> There is also interest in all the crypto things (kleo, kgpg & co), see the
> kde-commits thread of today.  I think one the strong things within KDE is
> the level of integration. The current situation is undermining that.
>
> So I would like to know how to proceed. I see a few options:
> 1) people agree with the GPL->LGPL requests
> 2) we lift the LGPL requirement for kdepimlibs
> 3) we create a kdepimlibs-gpl with gpl libraries
>
> Personally I don't need it to be LGPL so I would go for option 2 and let
> the parties who do require LGPL to worry about needed license changes.
Even though my opinion is probably not as important as those of the others 
here who are much longer involved in KDE PIM, I still like to voice my 
opinion.

My prefered option is 1), but that of course needs to be decided by the 
authors of those libs.

If some libs can not be relicensed, I would strongly prefer 2) over 3).
I am against creating yet another top level module kdepimlibs-gpl. Another 
module just means more time and effort building kdepim for developers and 
distributions. Additionally, this is confusing.

So I vote for 2). The remaining GPL'ed libs should simply be moved to 
kdepimlibs. In this case, the LICENSE and README files should be adjusted so 
that they clearly state which parts are LGPL and which are GPL.


But still, kdepimlibs-gpl would be better than the current situation.

Regards,
Thomas

_______________________________________________
kde-pim mailing list
kde-pim at kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-pim
kde-pim home page at http://pim.kde.org/