Attached is a patch that makes the PHP FAQ question generic. It does mention PHP, Perl and Python as examples.
In Perl's case I linked to the Artistic-Perl-1.0 license and not the Artistic-2.0 license, since that's the license included with the current stable version of Perl listed on perl.org. I realize that we consider this license replaced by Artistic-2.0 but the point of the links are to show the license that justifies the languages inclusion. I felt linking to a different license than what the current recommended version of Perl is using would diminish that point. I chose the Artistic license over the GPL as Perl is known for this license. The two additional languages I added as examples to the existing PHP had properties that I felt justified their inclusion. In Perl's case there is a specific statement at the bottom of the README that explains essentially what the FAQ is trying to explain in the context of the GPL (Perl is dual licensed Artistic and GPL). Python includes a statement asserting that it is Open Source per the OSD in it's LICENSE file. The only other language I really considered to include here was Ruby, which has a lot of licenses that apply to different files and I wasn't comfortable with the licensing situation enough to include it in the FAQ. This isn't to say that Ruby isn't necessarily Open Source, I just didn't feel that it was an easy thing to clearly assert in an FAQ. I preserved the anchor link of php-code so as to leave existing links working.
opensource-org-faq.html.patch
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
