MESSAGE
| DATE | 2002-05-07 |
| FROM | Ruben I Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [hangout] php license
|
Do you have a spare laptop?
> If I remember correctly, the FSF considered the php2 license to be a free software
> license of sorts, and php3 was under the gpl. This particular item was in relation
> to the license that php2 had. I am not sure what the FSF opinion is on the
> php4/zend licensing other than they do not consider it free software and do not use
> it or support it's use in GNU projects.
>
>
> Ruben I Safir (ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com) wrote*:
> >
> >
> >
> >On 2002.05.07 15:19 Jonathan Bober wrote:
> >>
> >> Ok, there are so many posts on this thread that I am just replying to my
> >> own...
> >>
> >> First, let me quote again from the FSF website, more briefly, and with
> >> some added emphasis of my own.
> >>
> >> ---
> >> The Q Public License (QPL), Version 1.0.
> >> This is a non-copyleft FREE SOFTWARE license.
> >> [...]
> >> The PHP License, Version 2.02
> >> [...]
> >> This is a non-copyleft FREE SOFTWARE license.
> >> [...]
> >> ---
> >>
> >
> >OK - I would disagree the FSF unless the terms of the license are not what they
> >are. The PHP license prevents the alteration of core ZEND and redistribution of
> >a New Zend. And that is the key. BSD and GPL do this.
> >
> >
> >> I am not too familiar with these licenses. However, the Free Software
> >> Foundation is arguably the definitive organization for defining exactly
> >> what is and what is not a Free Software license. If either license is
> >> not a Free Software license as the FSF defines a Free Software license
> >> to be, then someone should correct their mistake.
> >
> >Agreed
> >
> >>
> >> Now, this does not address the practical issues involved in the PHP
> >> license and the QPL. In practice, it may be that these licenses are not
> >> as friendly as the GPL or the BSD license, but that does not make them
> >> non-free. Let me quote again - "This is a non-copyleft FREE SOFTWARE
> >> license."
> >>
> >
> >See above...
> >
> >> As far as GPL compatible vs. incompatible goes, incompatibility in
> >> itself is not a problem with a Free Software license, except to enforce
> >> uniform Free Software standards. Other GPL-incompatible licenses
> >> include the Apache license, the Mozilla Public License, and the Python
> >> License. This does not make these progrmas non-free software.
> >> Incompatibility basically means that one cannot take GPL covered code
> >> and combine it with code covered under GPL-incompatible license X. A
> >> license is not merely incompatible because of its own restrictions - it
> >> is also incompatible because of GPL restrictions.
> >>
> >> We might say that the current BSD license is GPL compatible, because we
> >> can take code under said license and repackage it under a GPL-covered
> >> product. On the other hand, BSD-supporting people might say that the
> >> GPL is a viral license,
> >
> >
> >And in this they are just wrong. It's FUD and fustration. I don't even know
> >what this means. It's not even english. The GPL affects nothing other than
> >GPL'ed software. This is a fact, not fiction.
> >
> >
> >> incompatible with the BSD license, because one
> >> cannot take GPL'd code, package it with BSD-covered code, and release a
> >> program under the BSD license. In this sense, the BSD license is "more
> >> free"
> >
> >That is also not right accept for the simplist (and unacceptable) definition
> >that freedom eq choice.
> >
> >Freedom is a societal issue and freedom ne choice.
> >
> >Any thinking person knows this. There are degrees of freedom the BSD
> >license guarantees and degrees of freedom that the GPL guarantees. Form
> >the POV of freedom, the GPL does more because it restricts Paul from shooting
> >Mary giving Paul and Mary freedom.
> >
> >
> >> Freedom is about allowing the original developer choose how he wants his
> >> code to be used,
> >
> >That is not correct. See above. One persons choice can abuse anothers freedom.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> And as another note, this has nothing to do with whether or not PHP is a
> >> good or bad language. Ruben does not like it, but many other people do,
> >> and that is all I really know about PHP. The Free Software Foundation
> >> certainly has no problems with Free PHP code, just as they have no
> >> problem with Free Java code. My first post just stemmed from the fact
> >> that at last night's meeting, Ruben said something about PHP being
> >> non-free, and that didn't seem right to me, so I decided to check it
> >> out.
> >
> >If Zend is closed, like Brendan described, then FSF be damned, it's not Free Software
> >according the the FSF's own standards.
> >
> >Which just goes to I'm not the Stallman minion Brendan accused me of. Nor am I not
> >hios minion.
> >
> >Why not you do the research on the PHP license and structure and ask Richard why
> >the site says what it does.
> >
> >Either I misunderstand the licensing, Richard misunderstands, or we both do.
> >
> >rms-at-gnu.org
> >
> >May 2002 23:09:50 -0500
> >> Jonathan Bober wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > I thought that there was something wrong about the statement that PHP
> >> > is not Free Software. PHP is Free Software, just under a "bad" Free
> >> > Software License.
> >> >
> >> > -------------
> >> >
> >> > The PHP License, Version 2.02.
> >> > This license is used by most of PHP4, but one important part of
> >> > PHP4, the Zend optimizer, uses a different and worse license: the QPL.
> >> >
> >> > This is a non-copyleft free software license with practical
> >> > problems like those of the original BSD license, including
> >> > incompatibility with the GNU GPL.
> >> >
> >> > PHP3 is not under this license. PHP3 is disjunctively dual-licensed
> >> > with the GNU GPL. Thus, while PHP4 (which is covered only by the PHP
> >> > 2.02 License) is still free software, we encourage you to use and make
> >> > improvements to only PHP3. That way, we can have an active version of
> >> > PHP whose license is compatible with the GPL. If you are interested in
> >> > helping maintain an active version of PHP3, please contact the GNU
> >> > Volunteer Coordinators .
> >> >
> >> > and then the QPL
> >> >
> >> > The Q Public License (QPL), Version 1.0.
> >> > This is a non-copyleft free software license which is incompatible
> >> > with the GNU GPL. It also causes major practical inconvenience,
> >> > because modified sources can only be distributed as patches.
> >> >
> >> > We recommend that you avoid using the QPL for anything that you
> >> > write, and use QPL-covered software packages only when absolutely
> >> > necessary. However, this avoidance no longer applies to Qt itself,
> >> > since Qt is now also released under the GNU GPL.
> >> >
> >> > Since the QPL is incompatible with the GNU GPL, you cannot take a
> >> > GPL-covered program and QPL-covered program and link them together, no
> >> > matter how.
> >> >
> >> > However, if you have written a program that uses QPL-covered
> >> > library(called FOO), and you want to release your program under
> >> > the GNU GPL, you can easily do that. You can resolve the conflict
> >> > for your program by adding a notice like this to it:
> >> >
> >> > As a special exception, you have permission to link this program
> >> > with the FOO library and distribute executables, as long as you
> >> > follow the requirements of the GNU GPL in regard to all of the
> >> > software in the executable aside from FOO.
> >> >
> >> > You can do this, legally, if you are the copyright holder for the
> >> > program. Add it in the source files, after the notice that says the
> >> > program is covered by the GNU GPL.
> >> > ____________________________
> >> > New Yorker Linux Users Scene
> >> > Fair Use -
> >> > because it's either fair use or useless....
> >> ____________________________
> >> New Yorker Linux Users Scene
> >> Fair Use -
> >> because it's either fair use or useless....
> >>
> >
> >Brooklyn Linux Solutions
> >__________________________
> >http://www.mrbrklyn.com - Consulting
> >http://www.brooklynonline.com - For the love of Brooklyn
> >http://www.nylxs.com - Leadership Development in Free Software
> >http://www.nyfairuse.org - The foundation of Democracy
> >http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/resources - Unpublished Archive or stories and articles
> from around the net
> >http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/mp3/dr.mp3 - Imagine my surprise when I saw you...
> >http://www2.mrbrklyn.com/downtown.html - See the New Downtown Brooklyn....
> >
> >1-718-382-5752
> >
> >
> >
> >____________________________
> >New Yorker Linux Users Scene
> >Fair Use -
> >because it's either fair use or useless....
> >
>
____________________________
New Yorker Linux Users Scene
Fair Use -
because it's either fair use or useless....
|
|
