Re: Account Request

Hi Pierre, On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 23:51 +0200, Pierre Joye wrote: > > There is one caveat on this submission however: > > You're encouraging people to use the PHP License for their extensions. I > > feel deeply repelled by non-copyleft ("viral") licenses and cannot > > square publishing non-copyleft code with my conscience. If you don't > > mind I'd like to use the LGPLv3+ for this submission. > > I would rather go with another license. As lgplv2 is fine (not desired > but fine), I really have doubts about the v3. If you like a very > liberal license, use the BSD one. But I still one question, what's the > problem with the PHP License 3.01? Why should the LGPLv3 make a difference here? Both licenses (v2 and v3) express the same exception on their scopes for the binary results after linking to software under a different license. I don't like paper tiger ("liberal") licenses because they don't ensure perpetual protection of the freedom of software users. Either one of the BSD license and PHP license enables entities to republish / reuse code under arbitrary conditions, i.e. non-free software licenses. It's impossible for me to justify that. -- alexander kahl _ developer iconmobile GmbH _ methfesselstr. 30-36 _ 10965 berlin _ germany phone +49 30 886633 212 _ fax +49 30 886633 150 _ mobile +49 178 8279256 akahl@iconmobile.com _ www.iconmobile.com local court charlottenburg _ hrb 88308 managing directors _ thomas fellger | stefan kirschke

Attachment: [application/pgp-signature] This is a digitally signed message part signature.asc