> >> 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/. Charles -- Life with father Is more pleasant Since He got this Birthday present Burma-Shave http://burma-shave.org/jingles/1945/life_with_father
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature