The appdirs replacement is merged and pysword relicensed under MIT now. This enables the relicensing without dropping any features. So technically the only change to relicense is adjusting the license headers and the license file.
@springermac is the only main developer that did not agree to a license change yet. The others are @arjans, @crichter, @edwinlunando, @elderp, @m2j, @matthub, @meths, @milleja46, @rafaellerm, @samscudder, @sguerrieri, @thelinuxguy, @whydoubt, Stuart Becker, Gerald Britton, Samuel Findlay, Michael Gorven, Ian Knightly, Gabriel Loo, Dmitriy Marmyshev, Brian Meyer, Suutari Olli, Felipe Polo-Wood, Maikel Stuivenberg, Dave Warnock, Oliver Wieland, Frode Woldsund, and Martin Zibricky. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of OpenLP Core, which is subscribed to OpenLP. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1795876 Title: License violations Status in OpenLP: Fix Committed Status in OpenLP 2.0 series: Won't Fix Status in OpenLP 2.2 series: Won't Fix Status in OpenLP 2.4 series: Won't Fix Status in OpenLP trunk series: Fix Committed Bug description: OpenLP (GPLv2 only) is currently violating at least two licenses: PyQt5's GPLv3 only and request's Apache 2.0. There are two options to heal these violations: relicense OpenLP or replace the dependencies. A third option would be aquiring a commercial PyQt5 license from Riverbank and replacing requests only, but as it is paid per developer this seems to be infeasible for an open source project. REPLACING ========= Replacing requests would be feasible: urllib is already used throughout the codebase. Just use it for the currently three files which import requests as well. I do not know if it would be feasible to replace PyQt5 with PySide2. RELICENSING =========== You would have to use the GPLv3 license to heal both of the violations (GPLv3 is compatible with Apache 2.0). You could also use GPLv2 or later, but the logical license combined with PyQt5 is always GPLv3. That leads to another issue: pysword is GPLv2 only and a license move would require you to drop this optional dependency. But I guess this would be a minor issue as it is not released yet (?). I do not know if relicensing is feasible as you would have to ask the majority of copyright holders to agree with the license change. In either case you should inform your users not later than with your next (fixed!) release about the license violation as they could be in trouble using OpenLP. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/openlp/+bug/1795876/+subscriptions _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openlp-core Post to : openlp-core@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openlp-core More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
