On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 1:38 PM, Ian Jackson <
ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Ferenc Kovacs writes ("Re: debian status on using the PHP license for
> pear/pecl extensions"):
> > Thanks, I will try to not give up.
>
> I think this continued delay is getting rather silly. I have heard
> nothing other than these periodic pings. Can someone explain to me
> what the reason is ? Is it just that no-one feels comfortable taking
> responsibility ?
>
> Personally I think the right thing to do would be to:
> 1. publish the legal advice we have received here on this list
> 2. act on it
>
> Note that while in the general case it can be very unwise to publish
> legal advice, in this situation publishing it is (according to my
> reading of the advice) only to our advantage.
>
> Even though I drafted the questions that were put to our lawyer, I
> don't feel that I am entitled to simply publish this advice off my own
> bat. However, I am going to set a deadline:
>
>
> I intend to publish the advice we received[1] one month from today.
>
> I will refrain from doing this if I am asked, or advised, not to do
> so, by any of the following:
> - ftpmaster
> - DPL
> - SFLC
> I will also of course refrain if I come to the conclusion for any
> other reason that publishing it seems to be a bad idea.
>
> I will redact the name and email address of the laywer at SFLC unless
> they indicate to me that they are happy to be named.
>
> Please would ftpmaster or DPL let me know by 20th February if they
> think I should not publish the advice here.
>
> Ian.
>
Hi Ian,
I was just wondering if you were contacted or that you still plan to
publish the legal advice received back then?
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
