[libvirt] Question about PHP licencing for libvirt-php (php-libvirt for Fedora)

[Eric Blake]

On 03/09/2011 11:34 AM, Michal Novotny wrote:
>>    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
> Well, I've been reading PHP-LICENSE-3.01 file of php-pecl-ssh2 package
> and I found out following in the PHP license:
> 
>   4. Products derived from this software may not be called "PHP", nor
>      may "PHP" appear in their name, without prior written permission
>      from group at php.net.  You may indicate that your software works in
>      conjunction with PHP by saying "Foo for PHP" instead of calling
>      it "PHP Foo" or "phpfoo"

In fact, that paragraph is the very reason that the PHP license is
GPL-incompatible (note, that's GPL-incompatible, not LGPL-incompatible,
so we might still be okay with LGPL instead of PHP unless I'm missing
something else).

> This way we won't be able to call it php-libvirt unless we write to
> group at php.net for permission. Should we use the PHP license, i.e. ask
> for the permission, or should we move to some other license? Any ideas
> what license would be good for this?

The same gnu.org page states that PHP add-ons should be the only
projects considering use of the PHP license, but libvirt-php falls into
that category, so it's probably worth shooting group at php.net a mail
asking them the question.

-- 
Eric Blake   eblake at redhat.com    +1-801-349-2682
Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 619 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/attachments/20110309/0b1638b8/attachment-0001.sig>