Re: Inclusion of extension relying on commercial only libraries?

On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Gustavo Lopes <glopes@nebm.ist.utl.pt>wrote: > On Sat, 28 Aug 2010 15:39:06 +0100, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com> > wrote: > > hi, >> >> As you noticed today, there is a little debate about accepting >> commercial libraries binding in pecl. It is a gray area so let decide >> whether we want extensions for commercial only libraries (not related >> to operating systems but libraries). By commercial only I mean >> libraries like libpdf or libxl (recently propoosed). >> >> Please vote +1 to reject commercial only libraries binding and -1 to allow >> them. >> >> > +1; I don't see any rationale for "strongly discouraging" LGPL v2 libraries > and prohibiting LGPL v3 ones, yet accepting commercial libraries. > > If you don't see rationale, then you should vote for -1. -1 for me, but the dependency should be mentioned on the documentation page to prevent confusion. Tyrael