Changelog available here
Signed-off-by: Pierre-Yves <pyu@riseup.net>
Details
Details
- Reviewers
joebonrichie • sunnyflunk - Group Reviewers
Triage Team - Commits
- R625:eebecbca2d1b: Update digikam to 5.9.0
Open, modyfy & save an image
Diff Detail
Diff Detail
- Repository
- R625 digikam
- Branch
- master
- Lint
No Lint Coverage - Unit
No Test Coverage
Event Timeline
| package.yml | ||
|---|---|---|
| 6 | You dropped a license... Pretty important for other things to link against it. Also they are both or-later licenses as stated in the license files | |
Comment Actions
Fix: license
@sunnyflunk aren't you supposed to be on vacation ? ;-)
PS: If you compare the license on SPDX, you'll see that the text is always the same for the only and the or-later, so I use only by default unless I find an explicit mention saying that indicates a later version can be used (in a readme, on the web site, on a shipped .spec file/debian copyright file). For digikam, I havn't found anything that suggest that a later version of the license can be used.
Comment Actions
I'll admit I read what it said incorrectly at first. What I believe to be the distinction between the two licensees is the license header they add to the source files. If you read at the very bottom of the license it tells you about how you should add a little spiel (standard license header) to all the files. This is the part that differs between the two, while the rest of the license is identical. Here it states that you include the 'or at your option any later version' for the -or-later license, where if you wish it to be -only that version of the license, it should not mention other versions in the file headers.
I don't think pulling out, moving and restacking 14 tonnes of wood counts as a holiday xD
| package.yml | ||
|---|---|---|
| 5–6 | Actually make sure you fix this on merge. -or-later | |