Re: Re: com web/pecl: Strongly recommend including a licesnse, but not require it: public_html/release-upload.php

On Mon, 21 Oct 2013, Ferenc Kovacs wrote: > +1, and considering how little discussion was taking place before > making the license file mandatory. > > On Oct 13 the license issue was brought up when discussing the new > windows build integration for pecl(which I guess would be easy to miss > if you aren't really interested or care about the windows builds), > then the change was implemented the next day. Sounds like a pretty unilateral decision too... and something I've not noticed on the lists - and I read most of it. > Would it be ok if this grace period is kept for the end of this year, > then turning this back into an error? Actually, I don't think we should force people to use a licencing file at all. As a warning, absolutely, but just requiring this to make a release is silly. It would break a lot of extensions in pecl/*/trunk right now *after* the packages are made, and that's not even thinking about the pecl extensions not in PECL. cheers, Derick