Re: [PDO] [RFC] An Idea for PDO 2

Hello Steph, I would like to see a limited choice in PECL. And that one should neither include GPL nor closed source of course. To me PECL/PHP License and LGPL sounds fine. Maybe something more open is fine as well. In general I would only add licenses that are OSI approved though. marcus Saturday, February 2, 2008, 6:13:11 PM, you wrote: > Hi Marcus, >> Hello Wez, >> >> this would mean we will stop after PDO is half sorted out. History >> repeats. Let's discuss this and sort it out completely. Remember when the >> dependency system was developed by you? We stopped after it worked for >> PDO. >> Luckily that was the point where it worked for more. But if we had >> continued >> we might as well could have figured out the whole PELC vs core thingie. >> Lets >> address it now completely please. > That's what I meant. We either address the problems and then we have an > infrastructure that can cope with these PDO issues, or we have to leave PECL > out of the equation for now. > If we're going the PECL refurbishment route, can we have some way of marking > non-standard (as in CLA'd or differently-licensed) extensions to make > contributors' lives easier and future discussions of this nature moot? > Possibly even a separate CVS module that hooks into the PECL infrastructure? > - Steph >> >> marcus >> >> Saturday, February 2, 2008, 7:40:55 AM, you wrote: >> >>> On Feb 2, 2008, at 1:21 AM, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote: >> >>>> >>>> On 02.02.2008, at 03:39, Wez Furlong wrote: >>>> >>>>> At the time we prepare a PHP release, we could then take the latest >>>>> stable release from PECL for those drivers and put them into the >>>>> "core" tarball (and compile them for the "core" zipfile). >>>> >>>> Can't we explore making this the default for all extensions? Also >>>> while we are at it, I know a number of PECL devs are complaining >>>> about various issues like the branching to maintain versions for >>>> different PHP minor versions etc. >> >>> We can. I suggest focusing on PDO first and making sure that that >>> works out, and then we can gradually move other extensions in this way. >> >>>> IANAL, but it seems a number of additional rights granted by the PDO >>>> license could be folded into the PHP license. Also what cannot be >>>> folded into the PDO license, could maybe be put into an extended >>>> license (which would need to be allowed). This way the PDO drivers >>>> could be under the extended licensen maybe. Might make things even >>>> less problematic? >> >>> Maybe. I don't object to this, but just wanted to say again that >>> changing the PHP license is not an objective for PDO 2. >> >>> --Wez. >> >> >> >> >> Best regards, >> Marcus >> >> -- >> PDO Working Group Mailing List (http://pdo.php.net) >> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >> Best regards, Marcus