> On June 19, 2016, 10:37 p.m., Albert Astals Cid wrote: > > See https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/114979/ > > Albert Astals Cid wrote: > At least i agree with the "not eating such a common install path". > > Maybe we need to either convice distros to put something there or use a > more kf-centric install path? > > Michael Pyne wrote: > It might just be easier to make the license text a hyperlink to the > official license text and skip the install altogether. Alternately I'm fine > with a KF5-specific path, that part's easy. The issue is that when we removed > the license install we left out the part where we deprecated things like > [KAboutLicense::text()](https://api.kde.org/frameworks/kcoreaddons/html/classKAboutLicense.html#a6f78a3c04d397f613581dfee85d98a87) > that our Frameworks are documented as providing. Of course providing only a > hyperlink is also an API change but it would be SC/BC and we can at least > self-document the change. > > Either way I don't think it's a good idea to try convincing distros to > install licenses just to make our own code work properly. Each distro already > has their own ways of advertising the licenses their packages are distributed > under so I don't think they'd see a need to do additional work here.
I'd go with an specific KF5 prefix, after all you're actually suposed to deliver the licenses so i think it makes sense we do provide the full text instead of a internet link that won't be available if internet doesn't work. - Albert ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128103/#review96735 ----------------------------------------------------------- On June 4, 2016, 10:19 p.m., Michael Pyne wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128103/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated June 4, 2016, 10:19 p.m.) > > > Review request for KDE Frameworks. > > > Bugs: 353939 > https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=353939 > > > Repository: kcoreaddons > > > Description > ------- > > This change fixes a regression from KDE 4 by importing the license texts from > KDE4's kdelibs for the non-GPL licenses and for FSF's *GPL licenses > downloading the plain text directly from the source. I don't see the licenses > in any other KF5 module, and KCoreAddons is what hosts > KAboutLicense/KAboutData so it makes sense to land here. > > This permits the "License: $foo" hyperlink in the KAboutDialog to work > properly as well (previously there'd be a blank spot where the license would > be, now it shows up". > > Since I was working here I added LGPL v2.1 as a separate license, since it > has slightly different requirements to the old LGPL v2.0 (and obviously, to > LGPL v3). I can make that part a separate RR (or just leave it out, I don't > know of any apps using LGPL v2.1 off hand). > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/lib/CMakeLists.txt 466d714 > src/lib/kaboutdata.h 9fe4ade > src/lib/kaboutdata.cpp 2be3b62 > src/lib/licenses/ARTISTIC e69de29 > src/lib/licenses/BSD e69de29 > src/lib/licenses/CMakeLists.txt e69de29 > src/lib/licenses/GPL_V2 e69de29 > src/lib/licenses/GPL_V3 e69de29 > src/lib/licenses/LGPL_V2 e69de29 > src/lib/licenses/LGPL_V21 e69de29 > src/lib/licenses/LGPL_V3 e69de29 > src/lib/licenses/QPL_V1.0 e69de29 > > Diff: https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/128103/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > Compiles, and installs. Once installed, apps have their licenses show up when > those licenses are in the set of well-known licenses we provide. > > > Thanks, > > Michael Pyne > >
_______________________________________________ Kde-frameworks-devel mailing list Kde-frameworks-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-frameworks-devel
