Re: Re-Releasing PEAR packages under the BSD license

Justin Patrin wrote:

That page doesn't say why and lists 3.0, not 3.01, so I still don't know how/why/whether it would be incompatible. The point is moot, however, due to the rest of my comments in that e-mail. A license does not have to be compatible as long as you're linking code which is licensed in such a way that linking is allowed. This is true of the PHP license, LGPL, BSD, and all other licenses we officially allow for PEAR packages. As I understand it, the fact that you can link to some PHP-licensed code doesn't mean that you can include it in the package's zip file.

For example, say ProductName (a product distributed under the GPL license) linked to PHPLicensee (a product distributed under the PHP license). This means that I'd have to download PHPLicensee.zip in addition to ProductName.zip and install both of them separately. Or that I'd have to install PHPLicensee through the PEAR installer and install ProductName.zip separately. Atleast as I understand it. This is, imho, a poor alternative to simply including PHPLicensee in ProductName. The more steps you make the install process take, the more likely you are to annoy your user base and the more likely they are to run into problems. Atleast imho.