On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:17:40 +0100 (CET), Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hei, > > I've been deliberating looking at all the comments regarding PDO2 and the > CLA proposal to allow for some more thinking-before-writing. My first > impression was not much unlike Pierre's though. Now that I have spend some > time thinking about it, I am replying with my thoughts and comments. They > are my *personal* thoughts on this and can not be attributed to any other > entity. > > First of all, it's good that some attention is give to PDO. PDO is useful, > but > also has many rough edges in the ways that it behaves different depending > on different database connection libraries. This is highly annoying, even > more > because it's not really documented. Anything to improve this is good, and > support from the vendors themselves definitely would help here. However, > love to PDO should be given in a similar way as to the rest of PHP. I > disagree, > but understand, how PDO2 got started. It's not that much an issue to start > with a small group to talk about certain new things, but it should have > been > possible for other people to join as well. > > The outcome of this process is however what went into the wrong hole for > me. > From the start with Wez' commit to create a closed off module in *our* CVS > repository I was skeptical. I've now seen the proposed > CLA and PDO license and it seems my scepticism is justified. PHP has been > an Open Source project for more than 10 years now, and I've spend a good > deal > of my spare time in the last 6 years on it. Never was there any need for a > CLA > although there were some minor IP related issues which got cleared up > pretty > quickly. It happens, and a CLA can *not* prevent this. An example here is > that > when one of the CLA-signed PHP developers talks at a conference with > another > person (that did not sign the CLA) on some PDO related issues, the ideas > that > this other person brings up can not be used as it's not own contribution. > This > effectively stops discussing relevant technical issues with peers at > conferences for example. I know the CLA only talks about actually stuff > that > makes it in (into the spec or code), but can you really rightfully claim > it > your contribution if somebody else suggested it orally? Another issue here > is > that we can't really have a public bug tracker for PDO where people can > put in > patches. The PDO developers (that signed a CLA) can not even look for > issues as > they might be tainted with evil patches. This practise is in spirit > against > Open Source as we've been practising it in the PHP project. > > For now this CLA is only covering PDO, but once this precedence is set, it > can easily expand over the rest of PHP as "it works fine for PDO". Another > expansion could easily turn a CLA into an NDA if you really make it look > black. > > Another issue I see with the CLA is the patent clause. Where I live > (Norway) > and where I've lived (The Netherlands, Italy) there are no software > patents. > The practise does simply not exist, and for good reasons. Thoughts are > free, and should stay free. It's absurd that trivial patents such as > amazon's > "One click patent" are even *considered* to be granted. Because software > patents are such a moronic thing I would never agree to sign anything that > mentions that I "warrant that the submission of My Contribution will > include > accurate details of" "related patents" "of which I am aware off". Although > the FAQ writes that we're not expected to do a patent search, nothing is > done to prevent the litigation against individual contributers in case > their contribution *was* to be covered by a US software patent. This CLA > does not give this protection to the contributors that is mentioned in the > FAQ. > It merely serves the interests of the big vendors which have 10.000s of > patents themselves. In order to do real good for Open Source, those > patents > should be provided to the Open Source community free-of-charge. When IBM, > MS > and other big ones (Sun, here is your chance) provide their patents > portfolio > to Open Source projects other companies will think twice before trying to > sue > PHP (or their contributors) for patent infringement. > > Besides some of the more legal issues, I've also concerns about developer > interest in maintaining, or contributing, towards CLA covered bits of > code. > For eZ's projects we also have a CLA. There have been a few occasions > where > this CLA prevented people from contributing code. This is not what Open > Source > is about. It's not only about being able to use code freely, it's just as > much > as making it easy to contribute back. A CLA hinders this process, even > more > in the cases where simple updates (API changes in PHP f.e., proto updates, > operating system support improvements) can not be done by every PHP > contributor > because they didn't sign a CLA. I do know that there were not many > contributors > actually looking at PDO before, but I think that has no influence on > whether > a CLA is good or not. I think the lack of developers is more because of > the > mostly (undocumented) complex workings of the extension and its drivers. > > Besides this, the PHP project is *our* project, and if the big vendors > want to > make money through the PHP project by making PHP connect to their products > better, I don't see why they should not follow *our* rules instead of > dictating > their own. There have been plenty of occasions as well where code (tests, > fixes) were already contributed by either IBM and Oracle anyway. > > I also have an issue with the license for the PDO parts. Although the FAQ > writes correctly that there are some parts of PHP that do not fall under > the > PHP License, all of those parts have not been written *for* the PHP > project > specifically - they were always adopted from other sources. PDO is part > of the PHP project, and should therefore not come with its own license > that > has to be OSI approved again. > > I hope that I didn't forget anything in this longish email, but it should > be > clear that I'm totally against having a CLA on any part of PHP. > > regards, > Derick
Thank you for those thoughtful words. +1 > -- > Derick Rethans > http://derickrethans.nl | http://ezcomponents.org | http://xdebug.org > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php ///////////////////////////////////////////////////// Service provided by hitOmeter.NET internet messaging! . -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
