[Development] Qt modules missing mandatory LICENSE files

Laszlo Papp lpapp at kde.org
Thu Feb 14 12:59:04 CET 2013


There is one here, too: https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,47371

On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Jason McDonald <macadder1 at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Timo Jyrinki <timo.jyrinki at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > 2013/2/8 Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira at intel.com>:
> >>> I'd like to raise awareness that all modules and tarballs should be
> >>> shipping the LICENSE files required by the (L)GPL licenses. Currently
> >>> only qtbase is including the files. This is a license terms blocker
> >>> for distributing the modules.
> > ...
> >> I think it's ok. Let's just do it.
>
> Agreed. This was just an oversight of the modularization process.
>
> It shouldn't be very hard to make an autotest to check for the
> existence of these files ine ach module, and to verify that the text
> is in sync with the copies in qtbase.  I'll add that my list of "rainy
> day tasks".
>
> > Thanks. I did so for the core modules except qtwebkit which doesn't
> > need anything more besides the LGPL license text already included.
> > qtjsbackend also has only minimal amount of code under these.
> >
> > https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,47235 (qtscript)
> > https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,47236 (qtdeclarative)
> > https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,47237 (qtsvg)
> > https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,47238 (qtgraphicaleffects)
> > https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,47239 (qtmultimedia)
> > https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,47240 (qttools)
> > https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,47241 (qtquick1)
> > https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,47243 (qttranslations)
> > https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,47244 (qtdoc)
> > https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,47245 (qtimageformats)
> > https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,47246 (qtactiveqt)
> > https://codereview.qt-project.org/#change,47247 (qtjsbackend)
>
> I've +2'd those changes, except qtactiveqt, which seems to need a copy
> of the LICENSE.FDL.
>
> > The modules not part of official releases should also be updated at some
> point.
>
> Do you have time to do that?  If so, feel free to add me as a reviewer.
>
> --
> Jason
> _______________________________________________
> Development mailing list
> Development at qt-project.org
> http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/development/attachments/20130214/67434b33/attachment.html>


More information about the Development mailing list