Vote a.
Note that even if most of our codebase is GPLv2+, Inkscape as a whole is technically GPLv3+ for the moment, since it uses a few files from Gimp under GPLv3+.
A majority vote of the current board members is required for the
following matter.
Proposal:
The Board officially states that the Inkscape Project's intention is for
the main codebase to be licensed as GPL version 2 or later.
[ ] a. Approve statement that Inkscape is GPLv2+
[ ] b. The board should state a different licensing policy:
____________________________________________________
[ ] c. The board should not state a license intent at this time
Background:
When Inkscape's code was originally written, it was important that it be
covered by the GPL. At that time, GPLv3 had not been created, and so
version distinctions didn't seem compelling enough to necessitate
spelling it out definitively, and thus it generally wasn't. Indeed, it
was not uncommon to leave out the boilerplate licensing statements from
the code files simply for expediency; the assumption was that placing
them in the repository was sufficient for "inheriting" the standard
Inkscape licensing.
Over time the project accumulated snippets of code adopted from other
projects, some of which had different licensing policies. Generally
these were compatible with the GPL license of the codebase, but not
always.
Inevitably all of this has led to some developer confusion over exactly
what Inkscape's licensing policy is and what it should be. With the
added complexity of GPL version 3 (and other permutations such as "GPL
v2 only"), it is becoming clear that Inkscape needs to be more precise
at tracking the licensing of the codebase, down at least to individual
file boilerplates.
An obvious first step is to have a firm decision by the project about
what the licensing *should* be, so that all code that is descrepant from
that can be addressed, and the codebase brought into compliance through
regular development efforts.
Note that this decision will be only for the core codebase itself.
Plugins, dependency libraries, and other accessory codebases such as the
website, will need to be generally compatible with GPLv2+ (assuming
that's what we choose) to the degree that the GPL requires in order for
them to link to, or be distributed with, Inkscape, or else Inkscape will
be unable to continue using them; however, this board decision is not
dictating what the exact license should be for those products, and any
adjustments needed to them as a side-effect of this decision are left to
their developers to sort out as makes the most sense for them.
Inkscape Board <inkscape-board@lists.sourceforge.net>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Performance
APM + Mobile APM + RUM: Monitor 3 App instances at just $35/Month
Monitor end-to-end web transactions and take corrective actions now
Troubleshoot faster and improve end-user experience. Signup Now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=267308311&iu=/4140
_______________________________________________
Inkscape-board mailing list
Inkscape-board@...35...s.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/inkscape-board