[Nepomuk] Review Request: Fix license issuse reported by Krazy at EBN

[Vishesh Handa]

> On July 18, 2011, 11:23 a.m., Sebastian Trueg wrote:
> > Good catch. However, I would prefer to use the licensing header provided by KDE: http://techbase.kde.org/Policies/Licensing_Policy#LGPL_Header
> 
> Artem Serebriyskiy wrote:
>     Do you want me to prepare a new diff ?

Ping?


- Vishesh


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101972/#review4807
-----------------------------------------------------------


On July 16, 2011, 7:56 p.m., Artem Serebriyskiy wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101972/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated July 16, 2011, 7:56 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Nepomuk.
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Krazy in EBN reports that several files in kdelibs/nepmuk ar GPL'ed instead of LGPL'ed. This patch fix it. 
> Remark: Although I can create a review request, I can't ship it - only Sebastian Trueg can.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   nepomuk/utils/daterange.h 0d793d5 
>   nepomuk/utils/daterange.cpp cbb3b28 
>   nepomuk/utils/daterangeselectionwidget.h 16a6dfb 
>   nepomuk/utils/daterangeselectionwidget.cpp a3c4979 
> 
> Diff: http://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/101972/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Krazy do not report an error anymore.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Artem Serebriyskiy
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/nepomuk/attachments/20120616/07245fe8/attachment.html>