On Mon, 28 Nov 2005 16:39:52 -0500 Charles Fry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [Pierre, note the note for you at the bottom.] > "PHP software" should NOT be understood as "a piece of software in the > PHP language" as you propose, but rather as software distributed by > the PHP Group at http://www.php.net/software/. > > In other words, this license is still not acceptable for software that > is not available from the PHP Group at http://www.php.net/software/. The sentence was changed to reflect facts, a software contains PHP Softwares, which are available from the url you gave (given that you have to click). > > Perhaps it would be better to have the disclaimer talk about > > the authors instead of the PHP development team? Right now, > > only the PHP team gets the benefit of the disclaimer, not the > > authors of the software. > > > > IN NO EVENT SHALL THE PHP DEVELOPMENT TEAM OR ITS CONTRIBUTORS BE > > LIABLE FOR ANY ... DAMAGES > > Good point. I am CCing Pierre on this issue so that he can bring it > before the PHP Group. > > But I don't see this preventing Debian from distributing Pear packages > licensed under the new PHP License. Thanks, I hardly discussed those points with Rasmus, Derick and other people there. These changes reflect the maximum they will ever do. I will not ask more changes, it will bring way too much troubles on my back. Anyway you are right, the license is actually correct. I would love to have a better license for php (like the new BSD or a GPL compatible) but I doubt that will ever happen, sorry. I will still try to put a note in the pear manual to encourage the usage of other licenses (like bsd or lgpl), people are getting tired to "waste" time with legal problems instead of hacking :) Thanks for your work and keep me informed if there is any other troubles, Cheers, --Pierre -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
