On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Armijn Hemel <[email protected]> wrote:
> hi, > > > Since HUPnP is distributed under a GPLv3 license and libsolid (and > > Qt/KDE as well) is LGPL, this license "incompatibility" wouldn't be a > > problem for us? I'm not a license expert, but AFAIK, if a given > > library made under LGPL uses another library distributed under GPL > > this makes the first (in our case Solid library) to become GPL, right? > > No. > As I said, I'm not a license expert. Sorry for the ignorance. > > > Assuming that it's not a desired consequence, could Tuomo change > > HUPnP license to LGPL? > > Sigh. Step away from the keyboard *NOW* before any of you makes a big > (licensing) mistake. > Ok, calm down. That's exactly what we want to avoid. ;-) > First of all, *which* LGPL are you talking about? LGPLv2.1 or LGPLv3? > They are not compatible. Mixing GPLv3 code with LGPLv2.1: no go. Mixing > GPLv2 code with LGPLv3: no go. Just don't do it (or at least: don't > distribute it). > HUPnP is GPLv3. Solid (as all kdelibs) is LGPLv2.1. > Before you ask for license changes, please contact the legal dude at KDE > e.V. first to see which licenses are OK and which are not. The legal > dude is Adriaan de Groot and he is on this list AFAIK. Or, better, mail > KDE e.V. about this: [email protected] > > I think I'm not asking for any KDE license change, since HUPnP is not a project under KDE umbrella AFAIK. armijn > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > [email protected] | http://www.uulug.nl/ | UULug: Utrecht Linux Users Group > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > Kde-hardware-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-hardware-devel >
_______________________________________________ Kde-hardware-devel mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-hardware-devel
