Hello Steph, all we need is to extend the PECL database with a license type field and a CLA flag. Nothing else is required at that end. But we should still move as much from php-src/ext to pecl as we can.
marcus Saturday, February 2, 2008, 6:36:23 PM, you wrote: >> If we're going the PECL refurbishment route, can we have some way of >> marking non-standard (as in CLA'd or differently-licensed) extensions to >> make contributors' lives easier and future discussions of this nature >> moot? Possibly even a separate CVS module that hooks into the PECL >> infrastructure? > e.g. PECLA ? :) > This seemed a bad idea to me last night, but actually it could work out well > (assuming PECL itself is sorted out pronto). From the end user perspective > there'd be no distinction between PECL and PECLA extensions - both would > have pecl.php.net homepages and releases etc - but from the dev perspective > there's this whole marked area that you know you're going to need to sign > something if you want to contribute to it, and it would require a separate > checkout. > It also has the advantage that we don't need to wait for PECL to be fixed > before opening up the repository module, although obviously how well it > works would be down to how well PECL resolves its problems. > Thoughts, anyone? > - Steph Best regards, Marcus -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
