[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Kdenlive License follow-up.

From: Maxim Cournoyer
Subject: Re: Kdenlive License follow-up.
Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2019 16:06:08 +0900
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux)


Jesse Gibbons <address@hidden> writes:

> On Wed, 2019-09-18 at 21:40 +0200, Ricardo Wurmus wrote:
>> Hi Fanis,
>> > I asked on the KDE matrix server regarding the Kdenlive licensing and
>> > turns out they use GPL-3 in OpenSUSE. Most files are either GPL-2 or
>> > GPL-3 or later + KDE Ev. clause so the package can't be licensed as
>> > GPL-2 like Gentoo or GPL-2+ as in Guix.
>> Thank you for the information.
>> If you could point us to a file that is licensed under GPL version 3 or
>> later we should change the license in the package definition to (list
>> license:gpl2+ license:gpl3+) with a comment to state that the package is
>> effectively under GPL version 3 or later.

Is it really useful to record gpl2+ in the license list?  I've always
seen the license field of records as 'the effective license(s)' that can
the package can be licensed under, as this seem more useful to me than
having an long exhaustive list of licenses that are overridden by

So in this case, my personal preference would be to list the license of
the package as its actual license, that is, gpl3+.  Thoughts?


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]