Hi Martin, On 10/07/15 14:44, Martin Gräßlin wrote: > On Friday 10 July 2015 12:26:23 Maximiliano Curia wrote: >> Add missing licenses
> as the kglobalaccel maintainer I'm very surprised by your change. The > framework MUST be LGPL, because it's a framework. How come that you decided > that it is GPL? What is wrong? What needs fixing? I'm especially surprised by > the language. There are no po files in this repository - how can it change > the > license? The po/bg files are distributed with the kglobalaccel's tarballs and are under the GPL license, adding a copy of this license is only a formality required by most licenses, but changes nothing to the licensing state of the library/framework. > I'm surprised that you didn't raise any concerns on the mailing list or > contacted me as the maintainer. Given that it is a framework it should have > been obvious that there is a mistake somewhere and that changing to GPLv2 > clearly cannot be the solution. Sorry, it was not my intention to step out of the line. The licensing issue was found by the Debian ftpmasters and I've prepared a patch to make kglobalaccel acceptable for Debian and I've posted the reviewboard to get some feedback. I think that we are giving different values to the COPYING.* files found in the root directory, for me, they are only legalese that go together with the real licensing done in the files, but I'm not a lawyer. > Can we look into solving the root issue here? Gladly, the po/bg files seem to have been inherited from kde4libs, the author entries point to: # Zlatko Popov <zlatkopo...@fsa-bg.org>, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009. # Yasen Pramatarov <ya...@lindeas.com>, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013. We would need their acknowledgement to relicense these file that are used throughout frameworks, plasma, etc. I would recommend something like: The packaging efforts in this debian package are free software; the copyright holder(s) give unlimited permission to copy, distribute and modify it. which is the fsf's unlimited license, but any non restrictive license would do. In other components there are also GPL licensed bg translations from: # Dimitar Popov <ins...@fmi.uni-sofia.bg> I'm ccing the translation authors. Another option could be to drop the GPL translations and ask for new translations, with a better licensing. Happy hacking, -- "There are only two things wrong with C++: The initial concept and the implementation." -- Bertrand Meyer Saludos /\/\ /\ >< `/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
