On 03/10/2011 07:12 AM, Lyre wrote:
ä 2011å03æ10æ 01:17, Daniel P. Berrange åé:
On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 06:05:22PM +0100, Michal Novotny wrote:
Hi,
I don't know who's the right person to ask so I'm posting this into
the libvir-list. We're going to have the libvirt-php package in
Fedora (but renamed to php-libvirt only) but I don't know about the
licencing. The licence in the SPEC file (by Lyre) is set to "PHP"
however the licence file describes the GPL licence.
My question is whether somebody does know whether it's OK to write a
PHP extension under GPL licence or whether we need the PHP licence
for this.
The PHP license is *not* GPL compatible
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/PHP_License
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLIncompatibleLicenses
So, the libvirt-php module would have to be under either the PHP
license,
or something less restrictive.
Regards,
Daniel
The spec was copied from Radek's original php-libvirt with the License
untouched, I'm not sure about it.
Ok Lyre, then I guess Radek wanted to stick with the PHP licence.
However by naming it php-libvirt he was violating the licence because of
following paragraph:
4. Products derived from this software may not be called "PHP", nor
may "PHP" appear in their name, without prior written permission
from group@xxxxxxxx You may indicate that your software works in
conjunction with PHP by saying "Foo for PHP" instead of calling
it "PHP Foo" or "phpfoo"
I wrote to group@xxxxxxx already asking them for that permission and we
shall see what they reply to me.
Michal
--
Michal Novotny<minovotn@xxxxxxxxxx>, RHCE
Virtualization Team (xen userspace), Red Hat
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list