Re: Re: cvs: pear /PECL/smbc CREDITS IMPORTANT LICENSE Makefile.in config.m4 package.xml php_smbc.h smbc.c /PECL/smbc/tests 001.phpt 002.phpt
| From: | Rasmus Lerdorf | Date: | Fri, 23 Aug 2002 03:14:00 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: cvs: pear /PECL/smbc CREDITS IMPORTANT LICENSE Makefile.in config.m4 package.xml php_smbc.h smbc.c /PECL/smbc/tests 001.phpt 002.phpt | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-8600@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
> Mmh, It still all sounds a bit silly... -
>
> Like most licences, there are ways around this.. - on a normal GPL,
> licence - if bigCorpX came along and said they want to use your code in
> their proprietry application, you could say 'OK, but It'll cost you
> $XXXX, and I'll licence it to you under a different licence.'
>
> In a similar ilk, is there some way that the smbclient could be licenced
> by the PHP Group under a similar logic.
>
> eg. "Samba Group grants permision for this library to be used and linked
> against PHP..", since the Samba Group retain the copyright in theory,
> they have the liberty to say how it can be used.
>
> Rasmus did you get anywhere with stalman on discussing these
> 'opt-outs', to solve issue like this???
Yes, I have discussed this with him and this is a perfectly suitable
solution that he has no issue with. But, usually the people who develop
libraries and put them under the GPL do so because they do not want the
code to be re-usable under non-GPL terms, and by granting PHP permission
to use it they are opening themselves up somewhat. In this particular
case I believe the exposure to be minimal as there is no libsmbclient code
in the actual extension and the only thing required is a statement from
the Samba team that PHP is allowed to link libsmbclient against this
particular extension.
-Rasmus