Yeah, I would be okay with the very specific exception. 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
On Mon, Aug 4, 2025, 3:45 PM Albert Astals Cid <aa...@kde.org> wrote: > El divendres, 30 de maig del 2025, a les 11:53:45 (Hora d’estiu d’Europa > central), Albert Astals Cid va escriure: > > We are trying to move most of the oss-fuzz related files to our reops > > instead of being in https://github.com/google/oss-fuzz/ > > > > This will allow us to not have to depend on other people to merge > changes in > > them which sometimes creates a bit of friction. > > > > The problem is that those files are licenses under Apache 2 which is not > > mentioned in https://community.kde.org/Policies/Licensing_Policy > > > > I would like to propose that we add a point 18 to the policy that says > > > > 18. Files involved in the oss-fuzz tooling can be licensed under the > Apache > > License 2.0 > > > > Comments? > > > > Please see > > https://invent.kde.org/frameworks/karchive/-/merge_requests/125/diffs > > for one of the various places we would use it. > > Neal did my arguments convince you? > > At some point in the thread you stopped answering and I would really > really > like to proceed with merging > https://invent.kde.org/frameworks/karchive/-/merge_requests/125/ > > Is there anything that would make the addition of point 18 easier for you > to > accept? Maybe > > 18. Build scripts involved in the oss-fuzz tooling can be licensed under > the > Apache License 2.0 > > instead of "files" in general? > > Best Regards, > Albert > > > > > > Best Regards, > > Albert > > > > >
