Re: Account Request

On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 00:34 +0200, Pierre Joye wrote: > hi Olivier, > > 2008/9/24 Olivier Hill <olivier.hill@gmail.com>: > > Hello Pierre > > > > What kind of problems?? > > > > I don't like LGPL, but sometimes you can't escape it > > It could be important to remember what we are talking about: the PHP > extension, the binding itself. > > And not the underlying libraries. A library can be lgpl (2 or 3), BSD, > MIT or the likes (but not GPL), and the PHP extension can be under the > PHP or BSD License. There is absolutely no problem in such cases. Excuse me if I churn up questions that have been discussed before but where lies the actual problem of allowing developers which license to choose for their own code as long as it's compatible with the PHP License and a Free Software License itself? Excluding the question about "free" licenses, where is the freedom for the developer here? Is hijack-able code the price to pay to have it published on pecl? Although I have to accept your decision I'm unable to understand it. Is it a question of business-friendliness? Regards -- alexander kahl _ developer

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