Question regarding licencing

[yzhou216]

Is the license for python-ly GPL-2.0-or-later or GPL-2.0-only? It would be appreciated if you can add the SPDX license identifiers to the top of each file as well as pyproject.toml. This would help distribution package maintainers to license it properly.

[fedelibre]

Yes, we should specify the GPL version in pyproject.toml. I would go for GPL-3.0-or-later. And I would do the same for Frescobaldi (currently v2) and qpageview (v3, but the SPDX identifier should be corrected).
@bmjcode what do you think?

Adding the SPDX license identifiers to the top of each file is not required and I would avoid it.

[bmjcode]

I'm fine with GPLv3 for all our projects, but I think we should get a consensus from our other contributors on this. My vote wouldn't count for much on python-ly specifically since I've only contributed a couple incidental fixes.

[yzhou216]

I would go for GPL-3.0-or-later.

I agree with you right there, but we have to make sure the current license is GPL-2.0-or-later first, since it's one way compatible with GPL-3.0-or-later. Otherwise, it would be a license violation.

[bmjcode]

__init__.py says GPLv2 or later.

[fedelibre]

Ok, let's ask Wilbert and the other main contributors: do you agree with using the GPL-3.0-or-later license for python-ly? And for qpageview and Frescobaldi as well?

@wbsoft
@jeanas
@dliessi
@PeterBjuhr
@igneus
@FelippeRoza

[jeanas]

Fine with me.