Re: Updated Licence Draft

On Friday 23 November 2007, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:

> of the listed licenses, but only under certain combinations I would suggest
> to change "must be licensed under the terms of any of the following
> licenses" to "must be licensed under one of the following terms".

I agree. Jonathan, a reason why you didn`t pick that up (am I looking at the 
wrong draft?). 

> I would also suggest to add an "or" for the v2,v3 multiple licensing: "LGPL
> version 2.1 or version 3 or later versions approved by the KDE e.V." That
> makes it a bit clearer to me that there is a choice between all options.

+1

> Are we sure that we don't need a "(L)GPL v2 or v3" option without the KDE
> e.V. approved license choice? I guess there are people who aren't willing
> to license their code under a license they can't know yet.

Lets try to avoid it for now. we can still add exceptions later ;)


Dirk