Hi, I am currently looking into extending our metainfo.yaml files to provide
information about the outbound licenses of the artefacts that are provided by
a framework. Here a few examples:
Attica: Provides libattica, which is legally OK to be used as LGPL-2.1 or
LGPL-3.0 (and of course also as GPL-2.0 or GPL-3.0).
Baloo, which is quite complicated: The library is (supposed to be; there are a
few license issues here at the moment) LGPL-2.1 and may also be used as
LGPL-3.0. Moreover, there is the baloo-kioslave that is GPL, then there are a
few tools balooctl, balooshow and baloosearch, which are all GPL-2.0 or
GPL-3.0.
**First question:** Shall we only list ONE or ALL licenses, same for the
license information overview that should be on api.kde.org?
Now, I am wondering about the best approach to encode something like this into
the metainfo.yaml. I am currently considering a structure as follows:
Attica's metainfo.yaml
[...]
outboundLicenses:
libattica:
- LGPL-2.1-only
- LGPL-3.0-only
Baloo's metainfo.yaml
[...]
outboundLicenses:
libbaloo:
- LGPL-2.1-only
- LGPL-3.0-only
baloo-kioslave:
- GPL-2.0-only
balooctl:
- GPL-2.0-only
- GPL-3.0-only
balooshow:
- GPL-2.0-only
- GPL-3.0-only
balooctl:
- GPL-2.0-only
- GPL-3.0-only
For repositories that are simpler, it might also be a good idea to provide a
wildcard like "default" that allows you to omit all individual license
statements.
Thanks for reading and I am hoping for some feedback :)
Cheers,
Andreas
