On 10/14/2013 04:34 AM, Anatol Belski wrote:
Hi, there are two improvements just implemented to the PECL website. I Every package is required to have LICENSE or COPYING to be present in the root of the package. The goal is to enforce the conformance with at least PHP and BSD licenses. Where by no explicit check for exact license type is done, it's considered as a good practice to include the license. Also, the licenses will be included into the windows binary packages. To add that file to the tarball, just add a line like this to the root dir in the package.xml <file name="LICENSE" role="doc" />
This change just blocked me from releasing OCI8 on PECL. OCI8 has traditionally had the license information (http://www.php.net/license/3_01.txt) mentioned appropriately in the source code and package.xml files. I only recall limited discussion [1] around this topic and no discussion of hard enforcement. The upload form site shouldn't block valid uploads. It should do one of: 1. Only warn about a missing file 2. Recognize the package.xml license, perhaps just a special case recognizing the PHP license: <license uri="http://www.php.net/license";>PHP</license> (This would be my preference.) 3. Neither of the above. If distributions (such as Windows DLL builds) need to supply license information: 1. They can parse package.xml and locate the correct licence. 2. They can distribute the source code, if that is a recognizable part of the license requirement (IANAL) 3. They can decide not to make distributions if they can't determine the license in a usable form for their use. Chris [1] http://marc.info/?l=pecl-dev&m=138105661610785&w=2 http://marc.info/?l=pecl-dev&m=138105241009948&w=2 -- [email protected] http://twitter.com/ghrd Free PHP & Oracle book: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/topics/php/underground-php-oracle-manual-098250.html -- PECL development discussion Mailing List (http://pecl.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
