Re: GPGME as a PECL extension

Rasmus I had a look at the bindings for GnuPG - they include things like python, outlook and eudora. From the previous thread about the problems with GPL code bindings, it was the PHP licence's statements about using the PHP name etc that made it a problem with GPL code? - I had a look at the Python Licence, it includes a similar type of statement, however focused on the fact that python is a trademark. 'If' PHP was a trademark???? - would changing the licence to something more similar to python's trademark statement begin to solve this issue???? - in effect the trademark allows you to put pretty much all the same restrictions on the software and the name? or do you think that basically the GnuPG people have basically been a little 'loose' with their enforcement of the GPL? Regards Alan Patrick O'Lone wrote:

I was thinking about contributing a PECL library using GPGME, but I think the licensing terms won't allow it. Here's how it breaks down: GnuPG - GPL'd GPGME - GPL'd (why can't this by LGPL?) (PECL Extension) - would have to be GPL'd, without permission PHP - conflicts with the PHP License if GPL'd I don't think there is any work around, is there? It's kind of bad that you could write a wrapper class around the gpg CLI, and be completely fine (since input/output isn't licensed), but not write a native hook into the GnuPG library to just skip pass the klunky method. Any ideas? If you have questions, comments, or need additional information about the subject of this message, feel free to contact us via phone or e-mail. Regards, Patrick O'Lone ------------------------------ TOWNNEWS.COM/INN Internet Software Engineer Phone: 309-743-0809 Toll: 800-579-6397 Fax: 309-743-0830 Email: polone@townnews.com ------------------------------