Re: Account Request
| From: | Olivier Hill | Date: | Wed, 24 Sep 2008 21:45:45 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Account Request | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Groups: | php.pecl.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pecl-dev+get-5771@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Hello Pierre
What kind of problems??
I don't like LGPL, but sometimes you can't escape it. As far as I'm concerned the v3 is even less virulent than v2.
Regards,
Olivier
Le 08-09-24 à 07:59, "Pierre Joye" <pierre.php@gmail.com> a écrit :
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 3:51 PM, Lars Strojny <lstrojny@php.net> wrote:Hi Joe, hi Pierre, Am Dienstag, den 23.09.2008, 08:29 -0700 schrieb Joe Stump: [...]I was not clear. The decision was made to stick to: 1. PHP License 2. BSD-like and at the very least if the other two cannot be used: 3. LGPL v2 3. does not apply in this case and I already vote -1 on lgplv3 in PECL (enough troubles/pains already). Cheers, --Pierre http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org --PECL development discussion Mailing List (http://pecl.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.phpI agree with Pierre. And, to be honest, the most free license on the planet is public domain (which, unfortunately, isn't legal in all countries). The community has decided that LGPLv2, New BSD and PHP licenses are the only acceptable ones we'll accept to PEAR/PECL.To be fair, the decision was made when LGPL v3 wasn't even planned, am I right? So I guess it would be good to start a discussion about LGPL v3 and PECL but for now the license thing is fixed.