Daniel, et al.

By "KDEupgradeClause" you are referring to the previous posts re: KDE
reserving the right to decide on post-v3 versions of GPL as well, is that
right?

I suppose from the standpoint of our current SPDX license list short and the
spec guidelines, Daniel has a good point and my previous suggestion that it
would be "GPLv2+" (I know, that is not the exact correct short identifier,
but for expediency purposes...) is not exactly right, but more accuratly, it
would be: a disjunctive set of GPLv2 or GPLv3

Jilayne


On 5/25/11 10:35 AM, "Daniel M. German" <dmg@...> wrote:

Hi Bob, Scott, Jilayne, Armijn,

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 8:51 AM, Lamons, Scott (Open Source Program
Office) <scott.lamons@...> wrote:

This is the way I read it as well. However I don't know why they wouldn't
just license it under GPLv2 or GPLv3 and eliminate the "or (at your option)
any later version..." which seems completely unnecessary and forces you into
effectively dealing with a non-standard license in SPDX.

We (as in Ninka) decided to consider this a (GPLv2 |
GPLv3-KDEupgradeClause). It can also be considered: (GPLv2 | GPLv3 |
GPLv3-KDEupgradeClause) from a practical point of view
that would simplify analysis. It is not a GPLv2+ or (GPLv2| GPLv3+)
since the upgrade path is different (in the former one the KDE
foundation decides the upgrade path, in the latter the FSF).

--dmg

My 2 cents.

-Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: spdx-bounces@... [mailto:spdx-bounces@...]
On Behalf Of Jilayne Lovejoy
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 9:44 AM
To: Gobeille, Robert; spdx@...
Subject: Re: license name question

This would be GPL-2+ - as it's really just describing GPL v2 or later.
THere is no GPL v2.1 (that would be LGPL v2.1, I know, confusing!)

As for the KDE exception - the notice reads to me that KDE is reserving
the
right to approve future versions of the GPL for use as the license for
this
code, which seems different to me than an exception. I understand it
to be
saying - 'if there's a GPL v4, we want the chance to check that out and
accept or not accecpt it instead of preemptively saying we'll accept a
license before it has even been written.' Makes sense and seems
reasonable,
actually.

I guess I would think of this as different than an exception, since
usually
an exception usually adds or modifies the terms of the original
license,
which I suppose this does in a way, but in a different way than we
usually
think of?

Jilayne


On 5/25/11 9:34 AM, "Bob Gobeille" <bob.gobeille@...> wrote:

I just ran into the following license. It is GPL v2 or GPL v3+ KDE
exception. Note the absence of GPLv2.1. If 2.1 was included, the

name would

be GPL-2+-with-KDE-exception, but since it isn't, what is the

protocol?

GPL-2or3-with-KDE-exception
???

Here is the code license notice:

/**********************************************************************
*******

***********
* Copyright (c) 2007 Ian Monroe <ian@...>
*
* (c) 2010 Jeff Mitchell <mitchell@...>
*
*
*
* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or

modify it

under *
* the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by the

Free

Software *
* Foundation; either version 2 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 14 of *
* version 3 of the license.
*
*
*
* This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,

but WITHOUT

ANY *
* WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or

FITNESS

FOR A *
* PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU General Public License for more

details.

*
*
*
* You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License

along

with *
* this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
*

***********************************************************************
*******

**********/


Thanks,
Bob Gobeille
Hewlett Packard
Open Source Program Office
(http://fossology.org)
_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx

Jilayne Lovejoy | Corporate Counsel
jlovejoy@...

720 240 4545 | phone
720 240 4556 | fax
1 888 OpenLogic | toll free
www.openlogic.com

OpenLogic, Inc.
10910 W 120th Ave, Suite 450
Broomfield, Colorado 80021


_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx

_______________________________________________
Spdx mailing list
Spdx@...
https://fossbazaar.org/mailman/listinfo/spdx

Jilayne Lovejoy | Corporate Counsel
jlovejoy@...

720 240 4545 | phone
720 240 4556 | fax
1 888 OpenLogic | toll free
www.openlogic.com

OpenLogic, Inc.
10910 W 120th Ave, Suite 450
Broomfield, Colorado 80021