On Wed, Dec 21, 2005 at 04:39:41PM -0500, Charles Fry wrote: > My big concern at this time is not how Debian comes down on the PHP > License with respect to PHP (and by implication the Pear Group). > > I am just trying to insist that if we accept this license as valid for > PHP, then I don't see how we can reject it for use by the Pear Group. > Does that part sound reasonable?
Nobody should be claiming that a license is free for the original PHP, but not when anyone else uses it. We require permission to modify the work, and the result of doing so is something other than PHP, by someone other than the Pear Group. If you can't modify the work and have something that is still free, the original is not free, either. If you're asking "even if the license is non-free, can I close bugs against other packages since nobody has yet filed against PHP itself", the answer, of course, is no. (I'm sure that's not what you intended, but that's what it seems to come down to.) Overall, I don't see any strong feeling on this list that this license is non-free, and that's a reasonable rationale for closing these bugs. (Whether anyone has filed similar bugs against PHP, however, is not.) -- Glenn Maynard -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
