I see two problems with requiring my users to download ZF separately: 1. It's not user friendly. Users should be able to download a single archive, extract it, and install the application.
2. I can't guarantee compatibility with every version of ZF. Also, if I used the same logic with all included libraries for this application, users would need to download a total of 4 external libraries, and I would need to account for the varying versions of all 4 libraries. By including the external libraries in my application's distribution, users only need to maintain a single application, not an application and 4 libraries. On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:53 AM, Kevin McArthur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I can't see any reason the BSD license would prevent this, however, the > ideal solution would be to maintain an external reference to the official > framework repo, such that any fixes or changes could be contributed back > under the CLA and therefore available to everyone. > > I'm not sure applications built upon the Zend Framework should distribute > the framework itself, as from time-to-time, there will likely be security > updates backported etc. Getting the latest version of a minor version say > 1.0.3a should probably be the preferred approach. > > Some leadership from Zend on the whole packaging, distribution, patching > and security issues would be nice to have though. > > K > > > > Jordan Moore wrote: > Not sure why I said MIT, since I had the license right in front of me > and it clearly says "New BSD License"... but thanks for the reply. > > If anyone has an opposing opinion, let me know... > > On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Michael B Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 2/28/08, Jordan Moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm developing a distributable application that will be > > using/including the Zend Framework. I was planning on releasing the > > application with a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 > > License. Does anyone know if this is compatible with the MIT license > > that ZF is using? > > ZF isn't MIT. It's BSD with no advert. Although AFAIK they are > logically identical. > > Since BSD is pretty much a "do whatever you want" license then it is > basically compatible with everything. Go for it. > > In fact I think you could even take ZF and s/Zend/Jordan/g and call it > "Jordan's Framework". For a while the Linux guys were taking FreeBSD > drivers and just ripping out the BSD license header and putting in the > GPL header. But I think they stopped doing that because the BSD people > became very annoyed. And rightly so since it was effectively a > one-way-street because they could not bring any GPL'd patches back > into FreeBSD. > > Mike > > -- > Michael B Allen > PHP Active Directory SPNEGO SSO > http://www.ioplex.com/ > > > > > > -- Jordan Moore - Creative Director Sanctus Studios LLC PO Box 2202 Tacoma, WA 98401 (253) 238-8676
