Zeev Suraski wrote: > At 10:23 AM 2/5/2002, Derick Rethans wrote: > >> On Tue, 5 Feb 2002, Zeev Suraski wrote: >> >> > That may be trickier. License wise, it's under a different license >> (we're >> > not in a position to change it, New Riders, Till and Tobias are). I >> also >> > think it makes sense to keep it in a different module (like the ZE/ZE2 >> > will, even though they'll be in the php.net CVS). The build can >> probably >> > change to automatically include this into the manual, and it should be >> > possible to note that this part is under a different OS license. >> >> The build process already works that way, but otherwise I think we just >> should ask New Riders if the licence can be changed is needed. > > > It should be noted that I believe it'll be better for the manual to lose > the ugly license it's under and move to the openbook license, than the > other way around. But I've already done my share of license wars in my > life - if you want to talk to New Riders, go ahead.
agreement has been reached a long time ago that the GPL is not the right license for documentation anyway (although maybe for different reasons then what you refered to as 'ugly' ;) i hope that we be able to finaly decide on which license to switch to in march, and yes, the "Open Publication License" the API doc is now under is one of the few that had been suggested ... -- Hartmut Holzgraefe [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.six.de +49-711-99091-77 Wir stellen für Sie aus auf der CeBIT 2002 und freuen uns in Halle 6 auf Ihren Besuch am Stand H 18 -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
