Licensing: (L)GPL v2+?

[Andreas Pakulat]

On 26.11.11 14:16:20, Milian Wolff wrote:
> Hey all,
> 
> I notice that a lot of our files are licensed under the (L)GPL v2, which is not 
> on the suggested list of licenses of the KDE Licensing Policy [1].

Even worse is that many of the older code claims LGPL, but cites part of
GPL.

> I don't have much knowledge on licensing, and would prefer to follow an official 
> policy.
> 
> This means:
> 
> - new files should be licensed under one of the licenses as listed on the KDE 
> policy page
> - I will relicense my files (if there are any that only I contributed to)
> 
> Since the latter will probably be just a very small amount, I would like to 
> know from *all* contributors whether it would be OK to relicense your code as 
> well. Personally I think using the (L)GPL v2+ as approved by KDE e.v. would be 
> the optimal choice here. Take a look at the licensing policy and search for 
> "or for later versions approved by KDE e.V.".

+1 from me, feel free to adjust all code I've contributed to to "LGPL v2+
as approved by KDE e.V." for kdevplatform libraries and all the rest to
"GPL v2+ as approved by KDE e.V."

> Of course I'm aware that our codebase has probably parts from some 
> contributors that we cannot contact anymore. We can leave these files out for 
> now, and try to contact them later.
> 
> Does anyone know a tool that lists files with authors and license?

No, maybe there's something in kdesdk and possibly krazy has some output
that is useful from its license-checks?

> Otherwise I'll have to write my own script that uses the git log and
> some grep-magic to find authors and license.

IMHO if someone did not add his copyright to the top of the file he has
no right to complain about this change. Of course thats not technically
legal. So finding the people and license should be a matter for "head -20
*.cpp *.h". That'll also include an email address already.

Andreas