Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:99526
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain schlueters.de from 84.19.169.162 cause and error)
Message-ID: <1497530073.2627.10.camel@schlueters.de>
To: Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>, Remi Collet <remi@fedoraproject.org>
Cc: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 14:34:33 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAF+90c_nkK6h0hQRQ+C5qkkZ2XPAgQ=WNnPBHrOt+nF_zWryFQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2ad04b8f-76e5-4420-2776-5bda28f60285@fedoraproject.org>
	 <CAF+90c_nkK6h0hQRQ+C5qkkZ2XPAgQ=WNnPBHrOt+nF_zWryFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Extensions License
From: johannes@schlueters.de (Johannes =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Schl=FCter?=)

On Do, 2017-06-15 at 11:06 +0200, Nikita Popov wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 8:23 AM, Remi Collet <remi@fedoraproject.org>
> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > All extensions in php-src are PHP 3.01 Licensed
> > (libs may, of course, have different license)
> > 
> > Is there any strong rule about this ?
> > Or is it OK to have a BSD Licensed extension ?
> > 
> > Context: see sodium PR
> > https://github.com/php/php-src/pull/2560
> > 
> > 
> > IMHO, make sense to have only PHP Licensed ext.
> > 
> I think we should allow BSD/MIT licenses, as they are compatible with
> and
> less restrictive than the PHP license. TBH, the PHP license seems
> somewhat
> dubious when applied to extensions, as most of the additional clauses
> are
> simply not applicable (extensions do not bundle the Zend Engine and
> extensions have no control over the PHP group or the PHP name).
> 

Mind: The PHP License[1]  doesn't talk about the Zend engine, but "PHP
Software", "PHP Software" is, since PHP License 3.01 compared to PHP
License 3.0 defined as PEAR, PECL and PHP on [2]

The "this software includes the ZendEngine" thing in the PHP
distribution's license file[3] is not part of the PHP License, but a
requirement for the PHP product, which includes the Zend Engine
product, which is licensed under the Zend Engine License[4].

According to the most legal interpretations I know (IANAL ... ask two
lawyers, get three answers ...) a BSD-licensed extension bundled in PHP
would be relicensed under PHP license "automatically" when being
distributed as part of the PHP product.

I however think it makes sense to license all bundled extensions as PHP
license with copyright PHP Group as this simplifies moving code around
(i.e. if a BSD licensed extension contains some nice macro which might
be useful to put into main/ this is simpler from a stricter legal pov
if it's the same license)

johannes

[1] http://php.net/license/3_01.txt
[2] http://php.net/software.php
[3] http://git.php.net/?p=php-src.git;a=blob;f=LICENSE;h=9964e0737cc9be
0521b056be697a5fbeb14d01ef;hb=refs/heads/master
[4] http://git.php.net/?p=php-src.git;a=blob;f=Zend/LICENSE;h=8acb9af4f
8a589076f305c31501565a2cfe0f6ff;hb=refs/heads/master