Re: something I noticed re:licenses.

Anil, > If PEAR were released under the GPL, any code that uses it would also have > to GPLed; is that right? If it is, then it pretty much rules out GPL as a > viable single-license for PEAR... otherwise, is there any way to avoid my > code coming under the GPL, if I wish to distribute it? Two things: 1. There is issue of does an include("myclass.php"); or whatever constitute as some sort of linking. 2. Must the PEAR tree be a single license or can a dual license be toyed with. As to issue 1 its debatable. If such usage is considered linking then not having a license that is GPL compatiable is a bad thing as then GPL scripts cant use PEAR. If such a thing is not linking then you do not have to worry about what license the scripts using PEAR are (in relation to GPL) as you have not conflict. If you assume that is like linking (which a lot do) then yes the GPL alone as a PEAR license means that non GPL compatiable couldnt use PEAR which I dont think is what PHP Group would like. However you could use teh LGPL with is more like a BSD license or do a dual license. Derek Neighbors derek@gnu.org