On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 03:18:12PM -0500, Simon Law wrote: > On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 11:19:34AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2003 at 11:44:56AM -0500, Simon Law wrote: > > > Could the maintainer of PHP-Nuke please have a little chat with > > > the author? > > I think that the author is unlikely to relent on this, given > > http://www.phpnuke.org/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5536 > Well, the full context of that sentence is below. > > > This, of course, means that people who run PHP-Nuke must have > > > their webpages licensed as a whole under the GNU GPL. It also implies > > > that they need to reproduce the copyright notices in the output, perhaps > > > as HTML comments up at the top. This all seems rather silly though, > > > since the author has obviously not understood the license he has > > > applied. > > > Could the maintainer of PHP-Nuke please have a little chat with > > > the author? > What I really mean here is for the maintainer to ask the > PHP-Nuke author to actually relicense their software such that their > intentions are expressed in the license. Since it is fairly obvious > that he is not using the GNU GPL correctly, he probably wants to use > something else. > Of course, if he has accepted patches from people licensed under > the GNU GPL, then he's in a deeper uh... legal quagmire. This would require the PHP-Nuke author to accept patches. Let us say that the author in question is somewhat... notorious. See Google for accounts of the 'postnuke' fork (also available in Debian). -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpaN6y0SlYLU.pgp
Description: PGP signature