FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Kubuntu Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 10-01-2008, 12:15 PM
Peter Antoniac
 
Default Licenses in kdelibs...

Hi,

I noticed that Frederik said (on kde-core-dev ML) that kdelibs license policy is to be LGPL. Still,
looking at most of the debian packages containing kdelibs copyright notes I read:

"Unless something else is mentioned, the code files in this package are under GPL"

From:
http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/k/kde4libs/kde4libs_4.1.2-1/kdelibs5.copyright
http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/main/k/kde4libs/kde4libs_4.1.2-0ubuntu1/kdelibs5.copyright

And it goes down to all the packages, like libplasma2...etc...
http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/k/kdebase-workspace/kdebase-workspace_4.1.2-1/libplasma2.copyright
http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/main/k/kdebase-workspace/kdebase-workspace_4.1.2-0ubuntu1/libplasma2.copyright

Is this correct? Do I miss something? Whom should I believe?

Thanks,
Peter
--
Peter Antoniac, PhD
http://antoniac.name

--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 
Old 10-01-2008, 02:32 PM
Harald Sitter
 
Default Licenses in kdelibs...

On Wednesday 01 October 2008 14:15:16 Peter Antoniac wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed that Frederik said (on kde-core-dev ML) that kdelibs license
> policy is to be LGPL. Still, looking at most of the debian packages
> containing kdelibs copyright notes I read:
>
> "Unless something else is mentioned, the code files in this package are
> under GPL"
>
> From:
> http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/k/kde4libs/kde4libs_4.1.2-1
>/kdelibs5.copyright
> http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/main/k/kde4libs/kde4libs_4.1.2
>-0ubuntu1/kdelibs5.copyright
>
> And it goes down to all the packages, like libplasma2...etc...
> http://packages.debian.org/changelogs/pool/main/k/kdebase-workspace/kdebase
>-workspace_4.1.2-1/libplasma2.copyright
> http://changelogs.ubuntu.com/changelogs/pool/main/k/kdebase-workspace/kdeba
>se-workspace_4.1.2-0ubuntu1/libplasma2.copyright
>
> Is this correct? Do I miss something? Whom should I believe?

I would suggest reading the complete document. There is a list with copyright
holders and licenses underneath the short licenses, which for kde4libs is
almost exclusively LGPLv2

Regards,
Harald

--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 
Old 10-02-2008, 08:48 AM
Peter Antoniac
 
Default Licenses in kdelibs...

On Wednesday 01 October 2008 17:32:58 Harald Sitter wrote:
> On Wednesday 01 October 2008 14:15:16 Peter Antoniac wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I noticed that Frederik said (on kde-core-dev ML) that kdelibs license
> > policy is to be LGPL. Still, looking at most of the debian packages
> > containing kdelibs copyright notes I read:
> >
> > "Unless something else is mentioned, the code files in this package are
> > under GPL"

> I would suggest reading the complete document. There is a list with
> copyright holders and licenses underneath the short licenses, which for
> kde4libs is almost exclusively LGPLv2

Hmm, yes. But don't you find a contradiction between the statement of the kde-
core-dev about kdelibs to be LGPL and the statement in the kdelibs-packages to
be GPL? Shouldn't it be stated there that unless something else, here we have
LGPL as this is the license policy for kdelibs?

I am not good at licenses... I just happen to get bogged into this, that I see
as a contradictory statement...

Cheers,
Peter
--
Peter Antoniac, PhD
https://launchpad.net/~theseinfeld
GIT/CS a C+++ UL+++$ w--- PGP++ e++++

BOFH excuse #377:

Someone hooked the twisted pair wires into the answering machine.

--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 
Old 10-02-2008, 09:13 AM
Terence Simpson
 
Default Licenses in kdelibs...

Peter Antoniac wrote:
> On Wednesday 01 October 2008 17:32:58 Harald Sitter wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday 01 October 2008 14:15:16 Peter Antoniac wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I noticed that Frederik said (on kde-core-dev ML) that kdelibs license
>>> policy is to be LGPL. Still, looking at most of the debian packages
>>> containing kdelibs copyright notes I read:
>>>
>>> "Unless something else is mentioned, the code files in this package are
>>> under GPL"
>>>
>
>
>> I would suggest reading the complete document. There is a list with
>> copyright holders and licenses underneath the short licenses, which for
>> kde4libs is almost exclusively LGPLv2
>>
>
> Hmm, yes. But don't you find a contradiction between the statement of the kde-
> core-dev about kdelibs to be LGPL and the statement in the kdelibs-packages to
> be GPL? Shouldn't it be stated there that unless something else, here we have
> LGPL as this is the license policy for kdelibs?
>
> I am not good at licenses... I just happen to get bogged into this, that I see
> as a contradictory statement...
>
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
The package doesn't say kdelibs in GPL, it just says some parts are and
the parts that aren't are listed.
Changing it to be "Unless something else is mentioned, the code files in
this package are under LGPL" is a bit pointless IMO because the license
of the parts are already stated. Maybe it's something we could think
about doing next time we package a new kdelibs version, but I wouldn't
put much priority on it.

Terence Simpson


--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 
Old 10-02-2008, 11:16 AM
Peter Antoniac
 
Default Licenses in kdelibs...

On Thursday 02 October 2008 12:13:15 Terence Simpson wrote:
> > Hmm, yes. But don't you find a contradiction between the statement of the
> > kde- core-dev about kdelibs to be LGPL and the statement in the
> > kdelibs-packages to be GPL? Shouldn't it be stated there that unless
> > something else, here we have LGPL as this is the license policy for
> > kdelibs?
> Changing it to be "Unless something else is mentioned, the code files in
> this package are under LGPL" is a bit pointless IMO because the license
> of the parts are already stated. Maybe it's something we could think
> about doing next time we package a new kdelibs version, but I wouldn't
> put much priority on it.

To me, it is not that pointless. If the kdelibs are released with a license
policy LGPL I don't see why you should change it in the package, unless you
feel that you did something there that is GPL. From an OSS dev. it doesn't
matter, but for a OSV/ISV it might make a lot of sense to have LGPL vs GPL in
that text. My question still remains, why is it GPL and not LGPL there?

Thanks,
Peter
--
Peter Antoniac, PhD
http://antoniac.name

--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 
Old 10-02-2008, 11:45 AM
Terence Simpson
 
Default Licenses in kdelibs...

Peter Antoniac wrote:
> On Thursday 02 October 2008 12:13:15 Terence Simpson wrote:
>
>>> Hmm, yes. But don't you find a contradiction between the statement of the
>>> kde- core-dev about kdelibs to be LGPL and the statement in the
>>> kdelibs-packages to be GPL? Shouldn't it be stated there that unless
>>> something else, here we have LGPL as this is the license policy for
>>> kdelibs?
>>>
>> Changing it to be "Unless something else is mentioned, the code files in
>> this package are under LGPL" is a bit pointless IMO because the license
>> of the parts are already stated. Maybe it's something we could think
>> about doing next time we package a new kdelibs version, but I wouldn't
>> put much priority on it.
>>
>
> To me, it is not that pointless. If the kdelibs are released with a license
> policy LGPL I don't see why you should change it in the package, unless you
> feel that you did something there that is GPL. From an OSS dev. it doesn't
> matter, but for a OSV/ISV it might make a lot of sense to have LGPL vs GPL in
> that text. My question still remains, why is it GPL and not LGPL there?
>
> Thanks,
> Peter
>
We don't change the license in the package, the copyright file just
lists what license(s) the files are under. The license of all the parts
stays the same as upstream.

Terence Simpson


--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 
Old 10-02-2008, 12:08 PM
Harald Sitter
 
Default Licenses in kdelibs...

On Thursday 02 October 2008 11:13:15 Terence Simpson wrote:
> Peter Antoniac wrote:
> > On Wednesday 01 October 2008 17:32:58 Harald Sitter wrote:
> >> On Wednesday 01 October 2008 14:15:16 Peter Antoniac wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I noticed that Frederik said (on kde-core-dev ML) that kdelibs license
> >>> policy is to be LGPL. Still, looking at most of the debian packages
> >>> containing kdelibs copyright notes I read:
> >>>
> >>> "Unless something else is mentioned, the code files in this package are
> >>> under GPL"
> >>
> >> I would suggest reading the complete document. There is a list with
> >> copyright holders and licenses underneath the short licenses, which for
> >> kde4libs is almost exclusively LGPLv2
> >
> > Hmm, yes. But don't you find a contradiction between the statement of the
> > kde- core-dev about kdelibs to be LGPL and the statement in the
> > kdelibs-packages to be GPL? Shouldn't it be stated there that unless
> > something else, here we have LGPL as this is the license policy for
> > kdelibs?
> >
> > I am not good at licenses... I just happen to get bogged into this, that
> > I see as a contradictory statement...
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
>
> The package doesn't say kdelibs in GPL, it just says some parts are and
> the parts that aren't are listed.
> Changing it to be "Unless something else is mentioned, the code files in
> this package are under LGPL" is a bit pointless IMO because the license
> of the parts are already stated. Maybe it's something we could think
> about doing next time we package a new kdelibs version, but I wouldn't
> put much priority on it.

Yes, pointless. Peter, if you want this changed, then please contact the
Debian KDE team. Kubuntu and Debian try to keep a rather identical packaging,
changing the copyright file would mean unnecessary difference which needs to be
maintained. So the ultimate target should be to get the statement fixed in
Debian and then just merge the packaging.

Regards,
Harald

--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 
Old 10-02-2008, 01:01 PM
Peter Antoniac
 
Default Licenses in kdelibs...

On Thursday 02 October 2008 14:45:44 Terence Simpson wrote:
> We don't change the license in the package, the copyright file just
> lists what license(s) the files are under. The license of all the parts
> stays the same as upstream.

Yes, and the upstream states that it should be LGPL and not GPL So,
something needs to be done. I will try to point this issue to the debian
maintainers for the kdelibs as well...

Thanks for the discussion...

Regards,
Peter
--
Peter Antoniac, PhD
https://launchpad.net/~theseinfeld
GIT/CS a C+++ UL+++$ w--- PGP++ e++++

BOFH excuse #119:

evil hackers from Serbia.

--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 
Old 10-03-2008, 10:44 AM
Peter Antoniac
 
Default Licenses in kdelibs...

On Friday 03 October 2008 13:28:43 Adriaan de Groot wrote:
> It's not about the policy, actually, but about what the files themselves
> say. Bertjan Broeksema is looking into that, and I intend to pick up the
> license tool in kdelibs again shortly to check that everything is licensed
> that should be, and that the licenses are consistent.

Thanks! I would appreciate if you still keep us in the loop.

Regards,
Peter
--
Peter Antoniac, PhD
https://launchpad.net/~theseinfeld
GIT/CS a C+++ UL+++$ w--- PGP++ e++++

BOFH excuse #17:

fat electrons in the lines
--
kubuntu-devel mailing list
kubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kubuntu-devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:42 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org