Ángel González dixit:
> Please remember that we are just talking about changes that Debian
> itself may want to perform (so it doesn't require a renaming which
> would be bad both for PHP and Debian users).
Right, but Debian probably (though it’s up to Ondřej Surý, the
maintainer; there is no cen
Thorsten Glaser wrote:
Ángel González dixit:
On 30/07/14 22:00, Stas Malyshev wrote:
You could not distribute other derived products bearing the name of PHP
- but distributing PHP itself is fine, since it's not a "product derived
from PHP" but the actual PHP. If Debian OTOH decides to make the
Ángel González dixit:
> On 30/07/14 22:00, Stas Malyshev wrote:
>> You could not distribute other derived products bearing the name of PHP
>> - but distributing PHP itself is fine, since it's not a "product derived
>> from PHP" but the actual PHP. If Debian OTOH decides to make their own
The actu
On 31/07/14 10:54, Walter Landry wrote:
> Stas Malyshev wrote:
>>> Would you change the licence to something more usual, like MIT/X style?
>>
>> No, this is completely infeasible
>
> That is not correct. It is very easy to change the license because
> the license has an upgrade clause (condition
Stas Malyshev wrote:
>> Would you change the licence to something more usual, like MIT/X style?
>
> No, this is completely infeasible
That is not correct. It is very easy to change the license because
the license has an upgrade clause (condition #5).
Cheers,
Walter Landry
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
Hi!
> I think everyone does claim that. You do know Debian doesn't just
Everyone being whom specifically?
> distribute the binaries from Php.net, right? No contortion: the php5
> in Debian is a derived work. Here's a list of patches
> http://sources.debian.net/src/php5/5.6.0%7Erc2%2Bdfsg-5/debia
0 de julho de 2014 19:35
Para: keis...@gmail.com
Cc: smalys...@sugarcrm.com; t...@debian.org; pecl-...@lists.php.net;
debian-legal@lists.debian.org
Assunto: Re: [PECL-DEV] Re: Re: [PHP-QA] Debian and the PHP license
ngel Gonz lez wrote:
> Trying to keep the spirit of the PHP License and at
Ángel González wrote:
> Trying to keep the spirit of the PHP License and at the same time
> solve that strict interpretation, I propose the following change to
> the PHP License 3.01, which will hopefully please both parties:
Stop. Please just stop. Please pick an existing, well known license
s
On 30/07/14 22:00, Stas Malyshev wrote:
On the other hand, my own reading of the PHP Licence is that we may not,
in fact, distribute (binaries of) modified versions of PHP software (the
interpreter as well as everything else under that licence), period - but
You could not distribute other derive
On 30 July 2014 22:00:17 CEST, Stas Malyshev wrote:
> If Debian OTOH decides to make their own
>fork of PHP, they can distribute it still, but not under the name of
>"PHP". I don't think Debian even claimed that the thing they distribute
>under the name of PHP is anything but the original product,
Hi!
> This reading clearly fails DFSG#3 and OSD#3 at the very least, and makes
> *all* software using the PHP Licence non-free, because redistribution of
> derived works is only permitted from *.php.net which is clearly inaccep-
> table. This makes not just forking the software impossible but also
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Pierre Joye wrote:
>
>>As Rasmus, and I, said numerous times, the PHP License is a perfectly
>>valid choice as long as the software are distributed under *.php.net.
>
> This reading clearly fails DFSG#3 and OSD#3 at the very least, and make
12 matches
Mail list logo