From: "Hartmut Holzgraefe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Zeev Suraski wrote: > > At 10:23 AM 2/5/2002, Derick Rethans wrote: > > > >> On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: > >> > >> > That may be trickier. License wise, it's under a different license > >> (we're > >> > not in a position to change it, New Riders, Till and Tobias are). I > >> also > >> > think it makes sense to keep it in a different module (like the ZE/ZE2 > >> > will, even though they'll be in the php.net CVS). The build can > >> probably > >> > change to automatically include this into the manual, and it should be > >> > possible to note that this part is under a different OS license. > >> > >> The build process already works that way, but otherwise I think we just > >> should ask New Riders if the licence can be changed is needed. > > > > > > It should be noted that I believe it'll be better for the manual to lose > > the ugly license it's under and move to the openbook license, than the > > other way around. But I've already done my share of license wars in my > > life - if you want to talk to New Riders, go ahead. > > agreement has been reached a long time ago that the GPL is not the > right license for documentation anyway (although maybe for different > reasons then what you refered to as 'ugly' ;) > > i hope that we be able to finaly decide on which license to switch > to in march, and yes, the "Open Publication License" the API doc > is now under is one of the few that had been suggested ...
What should happen in March? I have heard of a PHPDOC meeting early March at or near Stuttgart in Germany. Why doesn´t appear some more information on this mailing list or is it a conspiratorial meeting? -Egon -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
