RE: [PEAR-DEV] Licensing in PEAR

> -----Original Message----- > From: Ian Eure [mailto:ieure@debian.org] > Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 7:23 PM > To: pear-dev@lists.php.net > Subject: [PEAR-DEV] Licensing in PEAR > > After trying to submit GPL'd PEAR modules[1], I've looked over the PHP > license, the GPL, and the LGPL. I'm feeling stuck, and I'd like advice. > > PHP License: > Unacceptable. I will not release my code under this license, unless major > changes are made. In particular, Clause 4 irks me, in that I'm not given a > choice to bind my code to a particular version of the license. With the > (L)GPL, I may specify a specific version of the license. This is an issue > because if a later version of the PHP license contains a clause that I > don't > agree with, I have no way to prevent people from using it anyways. > > LGPL: > Unacceptable. This license makes it far too easy to modify the class > without > contributing the code back. For example, writing a 'wrapper' class which > overloads the original, and changes the behavior, or adds a feature, or > whatever. Do you really think this is a real world issue? I have never seen anyone write a wrapper to get around licensing issues. Nor would I expect people to do it because it adds overhead, makes the design needlessly complex. > GPL: > Unacceptable. Prevents non-GPL'd projects from using the class. > > > So, what are my options? Maybe a dual-license? This is approximately what > I > want: > > * GPL-style code contribution back to the original class. > * non-GPL projects must contribute any changes, direct (e.g. modifying the > class) or indirect (creating a 'wrapper' class) back to the original class. > > Any suggestions? > we are waiting for a reply from RMS regarding the whole GPL licensing thing. Regards, Lukas