Re: license chaos, PHP vs GPL

> On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 5:27 PM, Jon Ciesla <limb@jcomserv.net> wrote: >> (...) >> A: One version with no deps. This follows the GPL and is the most >> legally >> correct option. >> >> B: One version with deps and one without. This is legally dubious but >> allows for one-stop installs. >> >> C: One version with deps, but that will still work if the deps are >> removed >> from the tarball and are installed on the system via rpms, debs, etc. >> This is also legally dubious but will let Fedora do it's thing. > > We are trying to avoid that "soon". ;-) > >> Currently, rc2 is broken if the deps are removed. > > Just curious - but does that mean I can't install PEAR and Net_SMTP > through your package manager on FC? If I could, what keeps you from > adding them as dependencies to the "RoundCube.rpm"? Can you fix the > dependencies in the package? Actually, you can, and the rpm does require them. That's what I did for rc1, which had the deps stripped out and worked. With rc2, they crept back in, and it didn't work without those bundled files in those places. I think something hard codes to those, somewhere. So, if that were eliminated, the rpm version would handle the rest. All the PEAR bits RC needs are in Fedora and Required by the rpm. > I know that Debian has a php-pear package - I wonder how that works > since it's under the PHP license as well. > > Till > -- novus ordo absurdum