[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: PHP License for PHP Group packages

> >> Point 6 is broken for anything !PHP.
> > No, it isn't.  The current point 6 is:
> >   6. Redistributions of any form whatsoever must retain the following
> >      acknowledgment:
> >      "This product includes PHP software, freely available from
> >      <http://www.php.net/software/>".
> > It does not say "this product contains PHP", or "this product contains the
> > PHP engine"; it says it includes PHP *software*, which is true, as the
> > software it includes comes from the PHP Group.  So it seems to be equally
> > true for PHP, and any packages implemented in PHP, if they are available
> > from http://www.php.net/software/ (which PEAR is).
> It says includes, which i underst[and|ood] as "PHP is in this",
> which makes it broken. Ok, if one goes and takes that as "This is
> software written in PHP", then yes, its ok. But well ok, i go with what
> a native speaker tells me, thats usually better than my broken english. :)

In order to understand the claim properly, the entire sentence must be
considered. And to perfectly understand the intentions of the authors,
consider a diff between the previous version of the license:

   <  "This product includes PHP, freely available from
   <  <http://www.php.net/>".

   >  "This product includes PHP software, freely available from
   >  <http://www.php.net/software/>".

In other words, they are not refering to PHP or to software written in
PHP or to software containing the word PHP, but to PHP Group software
distributed at http://www.php.net/software/, which includes PHP itself,
PEAR projects, and PECL projects. Or in other words, they are defining
"PHP software" with respect to this clause as referring to software
available at http://www.php.net/software/.


Life with father
Is more pleasant
He got this
Birthday present

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: