Re: License question
| From: | Rasmus Lerdorf | Date: | Fri, 18 Mar 2005 09:00:37 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: License question | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.pecl.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pecl-dev+get-2181@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Derick Rethans wrote:
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:It needs to have the same API. Just like the libedit/readline situation. If there is a reasonable argument that the primary library the extension is designed to link against is not GPL'ed and it just so happens that someone has taken this library, or written a similar library and put it under the GPL, that can't mean that suddenly our extension violates the GPL. Many licenses, including our own, does not stop anybody from re-licensing under the GPL. -Rskettler@php.net wrote:Just out of curiosity - should this other lib be API compliant or isn't that important?Is it acceptable for a PECL extension to support linking against a GPL library? Wouldn't that need to make the extension (and also PHP) licensed under the GPL?As long as there is a non-GPL library it can link against, it is fine.