On 31/10/24 5:47 am, Sune Vuorela wrote:
On 2024-10-30, Darshan Phaldesai <dev.darshanphalde...@gmail.com> wrote:
Few considerations:
First, I plan to include bridges for most libraries needed for
application development and so need to consider their licenses as well.
Second, This project will only hold the "bridge" code and thus users
will still need to install the libraries. I don't think this should
cause any license violations but the bridge code is based of the method
signatures of the original libraries.
Third, Upstream `cxx-qt` project uses Apache-2.0+MIT and I planned to do
the same but KDE's Licensing policy doesn't mention any thing about
Apache-2.0.
I'd say just stick the same license on it as the KDE Frameworks in
question.
Given they are a directly derived work and also uses the KDE Frameworks
underneath, giving any other license is just going to be confusing for
the people involved.
The app developers needs to deal with (l)gpl licenses anyway.
/Sune
Now that I think about it, this might the best way to maintain license
compatibility. Individual bridges can be licensed depending on their
counterparts.
I will make this change. Thank you.
Darshan Phaldesai
