Licensing: (L)GPL v2+?

[Nicolás Alvarez]

2011/11/26, Milian Wolff <mail at milianw.de>:
> 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].
>
> 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.".
>
> 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? Otherwise
> I'll have to write my own script that uses the git log and some grep-magic
> to find authors and license.
>
> Still, I think we could/should start this discussion even now.
>
> Thanks
>
> [1]: http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/Licensing_Policy

I agree with relicensing any of my LGPL2-only changes to LGPL2+ (which
is even more broad than LGPL2/3 or LGPL2-or-eV-approved, so of course
you can use that too).

-- 
Nicolas