KDevPlatform Copyright

Hi,

I didn't yet check, but in case any of the files in
kdevplatform/src
contain non-LGPL copyrights do those need to be changed to
LGPL? I think
yes, because thats the policy of kde libraries and AFAIK was
said to be
needed for the kdevplatform module. I think the plugins can
go with GPL
or whatever open license they have at the moment.

Andreas

-- 
If your life was a horse, you'd have to shoot it.

_______________________________________________
KDevelop-devel mailing list
KDevelop-develkdevelop.org
https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinf
o/kdevelop-devel

On Monday 04 June 2007, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I didn't yet check, but in case any of the files in
kdevplatform/src
> contain non-LGPL copyrights do those need to be changed
to LGPL? 

Yes, LGPL or something more liberal, but compatible with.

There was a problem in the old KDevelop, because it
contained code from 
Qt, hopefully it isn't present anymore (I'm just recompiling
everything 
including the new kdevplatform).

> I 
> think yes, because thats the policy of kde libraries
and AFAIK was
> said to be needed for the kdevplatform module. I think
the plugins
> can go with GPL or whatever open license they have at
the moment.

Probably yes.


Andras


-- 
Quanta Plus developer - http://quanta.kdewebdev.o
rg
K Desktop Environment - http://www.kde.org

_______________________________________________
KDevelop-devel mailing list
KDevelop-develkdevelop.org
https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinf
o/kdevelop-devel

On 04.06.07 22:37:01, Andras Mantia wrote:
> On Monday 04 June 2007, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I didn't yet check, but in case any of the files
in kdevplatform/src
> > contain non-LGPL copyrights do those need to be
changed to LGPL? 
> 
> Yes, LGPL or something more liberal, but compatible
with.
> 
> There was a problem in the old KDevelop, because it
contained code from 
> Qt, hopefully it isn't present anymore (I'm just
recompiling everything 
> including the new kdevplatform).

The qt designer contains code from Qt, basically because we
need it,
unless we want to reimplement that class which is hard
without looking
at the original...

BTW: KDevelop doesn't use the platform yet (thats why it
still has
lib/), porting everything at once doesn't seem a good idea,
because its
quite an effort and I'd have to ask people to not commit in
the
meantime...

Andreas

-- 
Don't look back, the lemmings are gaining on you.

_______________________________________________
KDevelop-devel mailing list
KDevelop-develkdevelop.org
https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinf
o/kdevelop-devel

On Jun 4, 2007, at 3:21 PM, Andreas Pakulat wrote:

> On 04.06.07 22:37:01, Andras Mantia wrote:
>> On Monday 04 June 2007, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I didn't yet check, but in case any of the
files in kdevplatform/src
>>> contain non-LGPL copyrights do those need to be
changed to LGPL?
>>
>> Yes, LGPL or something more liberal, but compatible
with.
>>
>> There was a problem in the old KDevelop, because it
contained code  
>> from
>> Qt, hopefully it isn't present anymore (I'm just
recompiling  
>> everything
>> including the new kdevplatform).
>
> The qt designer contains code from Qt, basically
because we need it,
> unless we want to reimplement that class which is hard
without looking
> at the original...
>
> BTW: KDevelop doesn't use the platform yet (thats why
it still has
> lib/), porting everything at once doesn't seem a good
idea, because  
> its
> quite an effort and I'd have to ask people to not
commit in the
> meantime...
>
> Andreas
>

why don't you divide and conquer then and get people to help
you port  
it.
--
Matt



_______________________________________________
KDevelop-devel mailing list
KDevelop-develkdevelop.org
https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinf
o/kdevelop-devel

On 04.06.07 16:34:06, Matt Rogers wrote:
> 
> On Jun 4, 2007, at 3:21 PM, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> 
> > On 04.06.07 22:37:01, Andras Mantia wrote:
> >> On Monday 04 June 2007, Andreas Pakulat
wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I didn't yet check, but in case any of the
files in kdevplatform/src
> >>> contain non-LGPL copyrights do those need
to be changed to LGPL?
> >>
> >> Yes, LGPL or something more liberal, but
compatible with.
> >>
> >> There was a problem in the old KDevelop,
because it contained code  
> >> from
> >> Qt, hopefully it isn't present anymore (I'm
just recompiling  
> >> everything
> >> including the new kdevplatform).
> >
> > The qt designer contains code from Qt, basically
because we need it,
> > unless we want to reimplement that class which is
hard without looking
> > at the original...
> >
> > BTW: KDevelop doesn't use the platform yet (thats
why it still has
> > lib/), porting everything at once doesn't seem a
good idea, because  
> > its
> > quite an effort and I'd have to ask people to not
commit in the
> > meantime...
> 
> why don't you divide and conquer then and get people to
help you port  
> it.

Well, because I hope to do that locally on my harddrive
without breaking
the compilation of KDevelop at all. Its not like its going
to take days,
just that I need to do some other things on the side ;)

Plus not many people are actively hacking atm.

Andreas

-- 
You recoil from the crude; you tend naturally toward the
exquisite.

_______________________________________________
KDevelop-devel mailing list
KDevelop-develkdevelop.org
https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinf
o/kdevelop-devel

On Jun 4, 2007, at 4:47 PM, Andreas Pakulat wrote:

> On 04.06.07 16:34:06, Matt Rogers wrote:
>>
>> On Jun 4, 2007, at 3:21 PM, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
>>
>>> On 04.06.07 22:37:01, Andras Mantia wrote:
>>>> On Monday 04 June 2007, Andreas Pakulat
wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I didn't yet check, but in case any of
the files in  
>>>>> kdevplatform/src
>>>>> contain non-LGPL copyrights do those
need to be changed to LGPL?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, LGPL or something more liberal, but
compatible with.
>>>>
>>>> There was a problem in the old KDevelop,
because it contained code
>>>> from
>>>> Qt, hopefully it isn't present anymore (I'm
just recompiling
>>>> everything
>>>> including the new kdevplatform).
>>>
>>> The qt designer contains code from Qt,
basically because we need it,
>>> unless we want to reimplement that class which
is hard without  
>>> looking
>>> at the original...
>>>
>>> BTW: KDevelop doesn't use the platform yet
(thats why it still has
>>> lib/), porting everything at once doesn't seem
a good idea, because
>>> its
>>> quite an effort and I'd have to ask people to
not commit in the
>>> meantime...
>>
>> why don't you divide and conquer then and get
people to help you port
>> it.
>
> Well, because I hope to do that locally on my harddrive
without  
> breaking
> the compilation of KDevelop at all. Its not like its
going to take  
> days,
> just that I need to do some other things on the side
;)
>
> Plus not many people are actively hacking atm.
>
> Andreas
>

There are at least three people working on summer of code
projects.  
They can (and should) help since they are a part of the
community.
--
Matt



_______________________________________________
KDevelop-devel mailing list
KDevelop-develkdevelop.org
https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinf
o/kdevelop-devel

On Monday 04 June 2007, Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> The qt designer contains code from Qt, basically
because we need it,
> unless we want to reimplement that class which is hard
without
> looking at the original...

I was reffering to things like
kdevelop/lib/widgets/qcomboview* in 
KDevelop 3.4, and there was something else as well before,
but it was 
probably removed for 3.4.

Andras

-- 
Quanta Plus developer - http://quanta.kdewebdev.o
rg
K Desktop Environment - http://www.kde.org

_______________________________________________
KDevelop-devel mailing list
KDevelop-develkdevelop.org
https://barney.cs.uni-potsdam.de/mailman/listinf
o/kdevelop-devel