[License-review] For Legacy Approval: LGPL-2+-KDE

[John Cowan]

Adriaan:

I think the right course is to use "LGPL-2.0-or-later-with-kde-exception"
and then ask SPDX directly to create "kde-exception".  You can see the
current SPDX exceptions at <https://spdx.org/licenses/exceptions-index.html>,
and the process document is <
https://github.com/spdx/license-list-XML/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md>.

 By the way, is it LGPL 2.0 or 2.1?


On Wed, Dec 18, 2019 at 9:05 AM Pamela Chestek <
pamela.chestek at opensource.org> wrote:

> Hi Adriaan,
>
> As suggested by Lukas, this is not a new license but a statement about
> various licenses that may be used. Because it is not a license per se, it
> is out of scope or the license review process. We will therefore not be
> reviewing it.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pamela Chestek
> Chair, License Review Committee
> Open Source Initiative
>
> On 12/4/2019 1:49 PM, Adriaan de Groot wrote:
>
> The KDE community is a Free Software and Open Source community that has been
> around for almost 25 years [1]. We have had a licence policy [2] for quite
> some time that says "LGPL version 2.1 or LGPL version 3 or a later LGPL
> version as approved by KDE e.V.". Well, the text isn't **exactly** that,
> and it gets written down in source files in various ways. Here is an
> example:
>
>
> This library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
> License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
> version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) version 3, or any
> later version accepted by the membership of KDE e.V. (or its
> successor approved by the membership of KDE e.V.), which shall
> act as a proxy defined in Section 6 of version 3 of the license.
>
> The boilerplate text provided by our policy is on our wiki [3].
>
> For the purpose of obtaining an SPDX identifier, we are requesting a license
> review of this particular construction: LGPL 2-or-3-or-later with a
> specific third-party named to bless those later versions. That is why I'm
> not going to put in the complete text of the LGPL 2.1 and LGPL 3.
>
> [ade] (KDE e.V. board of directors)
>
>
>
> [1] https://kde.org/
> [2] https://community.kde.org/Policies/Licensing_Policy
> [3] https://community.kde.org/Policies/Licensing_Policy#LGPL_Header
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> License-review mailing listLicense-review at lists.opensource.orghttp://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> License-review mailing list
> License-review at lists.opensource.org
>
> http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-review_lists.opensource.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20191218/26f78dad/attachment-0001.html>