Re: Re-Releasing PEAR packages under the BSD license
| From: | Sylvain Beucler | Date: | Wed, 20 Dec 2006 12:06:54 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re-Releasing PEAR packages under the BSD license | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-45322@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 04:00:27PM -0800, Justin Patrin wrote:
> You may have noticed that the Structures_DataGrid people already
> re-released their packages with a new license. I don't think that
> there's going to be an across-the-board license change as, even if the
> copyright to the PEAR Group stands (which is debatable) they tend not
> to take such broad sweeping actions themselves as late.
This is good news :)
You may want to update the FAQ again btw:
http://pear.php.net/manual/en/faq.devs.php
I guess I'll give a hand to mBSD'd replacements such as QuickForm2 and
this should solve my problem.
--
Sylvain
> >Given this last message ("This is inherently an issue with the GPL"),
> >I take it we agree there's incompatibility.
> >
>
> I am attempting to move to a different license on one of my packages,
> but one of my co-developers has pointed out something interesting.
> Apparently a while ago there was some discussion about licenses which
> concluded that the PHP License was better for PEAR packages than the
> LGPL and he's annoyed by the back and forth here.
>
> >
> >
> >On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 08:25:06PM +0100, Sylvain Beucler wrote:
> >> On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 09:58:40AM -0800, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:
> >> > Sylvain Beucler wrote:
> >> > > I think that there is an issue, admittedly not obvious, but that,
> >> > > using PHP professionally, I care about.
> >> > >
> >> > > Whether you agree or not, in any case, I still think it would clarify
> >> > > the situation to re-release PHPL'd packages under the modified BSD.
> >> >
> >> > Then we'll have to agree to disagree. This is inherently an issue with
> >> > the GPL, not with the PHP license. The Apache/PHP license allows
> >> > derived works with only a single restriction: use your own brand. I
> >> > really don't want to drop that as we have a constant battle trying to
> >> > fight perceived software quality issues and when software we don't
> >> > control use our brand it becomes impossible to manage.
> >>
> >>
> >> Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear: this isn't about PHP.
> >>
> >>
> >> I have nothing to say about the PHP license as used by PHP. As we just
> >> pointed it doesn't impact php apps under the GPL, thanks to the GPL
> >> explicit exception about the underlying programming language.
> >>
> >> I know that there were requests for changes in the PHP License itself
> >> in the past but that's a separate issue and I'm not involved with
> >> that.
> >>
> >>
> >> Now, when applied to a PEAR package, the branding clauses of the PHP
> >> License, besides being pointless in that context, cause
> >> incompatibility with the GNU GPL.
> >>
> >> Since PHPL'd packages are not part of the PHP language itself, that
> >> GPL exception does not apply, hence the incompatibility.
> >>
> >>
> >> So, I'm simply asking whether those PEAR packages under the PHPL, and
> >> owned by the PHP group, could be re-released under the mBSD to ease
> >> their use in GPL'd apps.