> Yes, I am afraid that regarding GPL I have to agree with > Microsoft when they say it is a cancer. The problem is that if you want to > distribute something that incorporates GPL licensed components, your > software also needs to be distributed as GPL and so it gets contaminated. > This means that you can't sell your closed source software if you > incorporate GPL components.
I'm quite happy to be corrected on this but I have always understood GPL licensing to mean that any GPL code you include should be available in source version. The methods by which you use that GPL code doesn't necessarily have to be included. The only relevant example I can think of is if you include a class in php that is GPL then you have to distribute the source even if you compile it with zend for your own application. It is my understanding, in this situation, that you aren't necessarily required to release the code you have written as GPL though. Basically, I thought that once something is GPL it is pretty much public forever but that doesn't stop you from including it in your own proprietory work as long as you include the source for the GPL stuff. CYA, Dave -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
