Re: [PHP] licenses, etc From: Alex Black (enigma <email protected>)
Date: 12/17/00

> If you go with GPL you force anyone using binarycloud to GPL any additions,
> which will not sit well with all prospective paying non-technical clients.

yes, but that's exactly what I want.

for example, if you are a firm building something for a client, and you
build modules for that client's specific needs, they are a) yours and b)
almost always useless to the outside world.

_but_ if you make an improvement to the permissions system, of the form
bulder library, I want that code back, so everyone can benefit from it.

> I believe the PHP community has show an extraordinary commitment to
> improving software, fostering communication and learning, and holding to the
> spirit of open-source.

Absolutely. One of the reasons I did this whole thing in php. That and php
rocks :)

> LGPL with an encouragement and kudos for contribution where possible still
> keeps binarycloud open, but allows people to write applications with it.
> From my understanding, under LGPL any fundamental 'core' changes will be
> included under the license, though if developers do need to keep modules
> separate, they will be able to, but will also have the freedom of including
> any modules under LGPL if they want to.

Right, I haven't had time to read LGPL today, I will tomorrow, but I thought
the basic jist was that you could compile lgpl stuff into commercial
applications, which would be sold.

That can never happen to binarycloud. This is pretty esoteric, but
important:

    if a firm that builds web apps as their primary business gets money to
_configure_ binarycloud, linux, apache, etc, and to _build_new_modules_ that
is fine with me.

    if a different firm builds a couple modules, and packages the whole
thing up and calls it "whatever's groovy packaged web-app" and doesn't
credit the copyright holder (my company) and the developers, and other
copyright holders, that would piss me off, i.e. I cannot allow it.

that is a very subtle difference, but important to me.

I have spent a _lot_ of money getting this system done right, so i need to
be very careful about how it is used out in the world. At the same time, I'm
not interested in stopping people from legitimately using it. (for obvious
reasons)

> In short, my opinion is that GPL is best used for 'complete' applications,
> so that they cannot be extended in a proprietary manner, locking out
> competitors and robbing the development community of refinements they have a
> direct stake in and responsibility for. I believe LGPL is much better when
> creating code that may be used as foundation building blocks for other
> applications that may, in a business sense, exceed the scope of the original
> application.

At the moment, I have no actual basis for comparison besided the "vague
memory" stuff I said above, I'll read the LGPL, and post tomorrow :)

thanks andrew. :)

_a 

-- 
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, e-mail: php-general-unsubscribe <email protected>
For additional commands, e-mail: php-general-help <email protected>
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: php-list-admin <email protected>