Guidelines and HOWTOs/Relicensing/KDE Relicensing
KDE GPL v2.0 Relicensing effort
Why does it matter ?
A couple of KDE dependent projects or even libraries have moved or are going to move to GPLv3 (State of GPLv3 movement).
Unfortunately, GPL v3 is incompatible with GPL v2. This means that it is not possible to create a project linking GPL v2 and v3 code together. There is no problem for projects which are licensed GPLv2+ (version 2 or above).
A few parts of KDE are currently licensed as GPLv2 only. So far we have no reason to believe that this was something other than an oversight. However, we still need to validate with the individual copyright holders that a relicense to GPLv2+ or GPLv2+v3 is okay with them.
Therefore, in an effort we're trying to identify the contributors that have contributed under the terms of GPLv2 and where the "+" part was not explicetly mentioned. If we know that all contributors agreed to a relicense, we can go ahead and flip the license of the individual source file.
How can I help ?
By identifying a contributor who as contributed under the terms of GPLv2 (use kdesdk/scripts/relicensecheck.pl on the file in question or the Relicense Status Page), and contacting him if he wasn't already contacted. Ask him the following questions:
- Are you okay with relicensing your contributions done under GPLv2 to GPLv2+?
- Are you okay with relicensing your contributions done under GPLv2 to GPLv2 or GPLv3 ?
- Are you okay with relicensing your contributions done under LGPLv2 to LGPLv2+?
- Are you okay with relicensing your contributions done under LGPLv2 to LGPLv2 or LGPLv3?
- Are you okay with the KDE e.V. deciding on a future licensing change to your code, should that be necessary?
- you checkout relicensecheck.pl from trunk/KDE/kdesdk/scripts
- you run it on the file or directory in question
- you interpret the result. check each commit that is being complained about carefully. Try to get the copyright's holder's permission. if you get it, update the whitelist in the script.
- review the list of declared copyright holders in the file.
- if you're all clear, change the license to the most liberal license possible. Document your change verbosely in the SVN commit log.
Current Reply List
- Please keep the list sorted by family name!
- Please only use "YES" or "NO"
|Name||GPLv2->GPLv2+||LGPLv2 -> LGPLv2+||GPLv2 -> GPLv2+v3||LGPLv2 -> LGPLv2+LGPLv3||KDE e.V. decides|
|Trueg, Sebastian (Exception: K3b)||YES||YES||YES||YES||YES|
Current TODO List
- Tobias Koenig
- Matthew Woehlke
- Daniel Teske
- Dawit Alemayehu
- Alex Zepeda
- Thomas Leitner
- Lars Knoll
- Kevin Ottens
- Simon Hausmann
- Maksim Orlovich
- Sirtaj Singh Kang
- Karol Szwed
- Thorsten Roeder
- Joseph Wenninger
Current list of problematic Files
Tom Albers has written a webfrontend to relicensecheck.pl, which makes it really easy to find files that can already be relicensed, or for those that can not it is possible to easily see (via tooltip) which commits are preventing it.
Current top 30 of possible contributors to GPLv2-only files
59212 ingwa 38032 bulygin 32243 dfaure 23647 sequitur 19747 amantia 18148 mutz 17365 rdale 17149 trueg 15012 tokoe 14218 lunakl 11806 winterz 10603 coolo 10449 mbuesch 10094 thorsen 9339 arnorehn 7424 rogowski 7382 cies 6177 gyurco 6130 mlaurent 5612 cramblitt 5531 mrudolf 5028 tilladam 4605 kloecker 4390 mkretz 4327 waba 4216 cschlaeg 4159 burghard 4152 johnflux 3327 fredrik 3154 gungl