Re: [PECL-DEV] Debian request to change the PHP license for Extensions
Hi!
> I think the difference is that we have a couple of clauses which sounds
> weird/makes no sense when the license is used for extensions or anything
> else than php-src, like clause 3, 4 and 6.
> And this is what they were complaining about in the thread referenced
> from their reject faq:
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/08/msg00128.html
I understand they have a problem with 4, which we could maybe solve by
having PHP Group grant Debian the permission, or by clarifying that
merely patching PHP for purposes of BC or OS compatibility or such does
not make it a separate derived product.
With 5. I do not see any problem - looks like they misunderstand what it
means. It has the "or" clause - you can always keep the license you had,
and it's a pretty standard thing AFAIK.
> Yeah, but maybe we could do something like creating a new version of the
> license which makes it a bit clear, what do we mean by derived work(do
Creating a new software license is a pretty huge undertaking. Even
modification probably needs a good lawyer to look into it.
> we consider exts/sapis/etc. derived ork or not), removing the "PHP
> includes the Zend Engine, freely available at <http://www.zend.com>."
> part, as only php-src includes the ZE, and it isn't available from
> zend.com <http://zend.com> anymore imo.
As part of Zend Server, I'm pretty sure it still is. But this part is
quite outdated. Maybe Zend wants to sponsor some work here about
updating the license?
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
Reply to: