Quality assurance proposition for HTMLSax3

[Note]: Apologize for the non-english readers...

	Hi all !

While packaging SPIP for debian, I came across files that
where extracted from 
the PEAR package HTMLSax3 [1]

We have had some trouble with them for the following
reasons:
* Licence headers claim they are un der PHP licence version
2.02 but gives a 
link to version 3 for details.
* A PHP licenced packaged should be distributed only as a
php related package, 
for licencing claims issues.
* Only version 3 is accepted, under previous condition.

So, we'd like to clarify licence to version 3, which is at
least what's 
claimed as its content, and then package it as a php-*
package.

We have tried to contact maintainers and filled a bug on
PEAR [2], but did not 
receive any answer.
As it seems, the project is not maintained since 2004.

I don't know if you do some similar work that our QA does,
but until original 
maitainer speaks up, or we find any candidate to maintain it
and if you don't 
already do this, I'd like to propose some QA maintenance on
HTMLSax3. 

I cannot at all maintain the package, but at least I could
clarify licencing 
and apply any security related patch that could be sumbited.
That's basicaly 
the work that a debian maintainer does for its stable
packages.

That is not a good solution, but's that the least we can do,
since this code 
is already is some of our packages (gallery, gallery2 and
knowledgeroot) and 
possibly used by many other webapps projects..


Romain

[1]: http://pear.
php.net/package/XML_HTMLSax3
[2]: http://pear.php.net/bu
gs/12159
-- 
If you are the big tree,
We are the small axe,
Ready to cut you down,
Sharpen to cut you down...

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

Romain Beauxis wrote:
> [Note]: Apologize for the non-english readers...
> 
> 	Hi all !
> 
> While packaging SPIP for debian, I came across files
that where extracted from 
> the PEAR package HTMLSax3 [1]
> 
> We have had some trouble with them for the following
reasons:
> * Licence headers claim they are un der PHP licence
version 2.02 but gives a 
> link to version 3 for details.
> * A PHP licenced packaged should be distributed only as
a php related package, 
> for licencing claims issues.
> * Only version 3 is accepted, under previous
condition.
> 
> So, we'd like to clarify licence to version 3, which is
at least what's 
> claimed as its content, and then package it as a php-*
package.

I have contacted Harry. His email address is defunct, but I
got someone 
to update it to his current one. So now he can get a new
password and 
fix the license issues.

regards,
Lukas

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

On 10/3/07, Lukas Kahwe Smith <mlspooteeweet.org> wrote:
> Romain Beauxis wrote:
> > [Note]: Apologize for the non-english readers...
> >
> >       Hi all !
> >
> > While packaging SPIP for debian, I came across
files that where extracted from
> > the PEAR package HTMLSax3 [1]
> >
> > We have had some trouble with them for the
following reasons:
> > * Licence headers claim they are un der PHP
licence version 2.02 but gives a
> > link to version 3 for details.
> > * A PHP licenced packaged should be distributed
only as a php related package,
> > for licencing claims issues.
> > * Only version 3 is accepted, under previous
condition.
> >
> > So, we'd like to clarify licence to version 3,
which is at least what's
> > claimed as its content, and then package it as a
php-* package.
>
> I have contacted Harry. His email address is defunct,
but I got someone
> to update it to his current one. So now he can get a
new password and
> fix the license issues.
>
> regards,
> Lukas
>
> --
> PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php
>
>

Thanks a lot Lukas, was doing that as we speak.


-- 
David Coallier,
Founder & Software Architect,
Agora Production (http://agoraproduction.com
)
51.42.06.70.18

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

Hi,

have you any feedback for us?

regards,
Frank

> I have contacted Harry. His email address is defunct,
but I got someone
> to update it to his current one. So now he can get a
new password and
> fix the license issues.
>
> regards,
> Lukas

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

Hi,

> I have contacted Harry. His email address is defunct,
but I got someone
> to update it to his current one. So now he can get a
new password and
> fix the license issues.

No changes up to yet. So what did he say? A fast solution
for this problem is 
welcome.

Thanks
Frank Habermann

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

On 20.10.2007, at 19:50, Frank Habermann wrote:

> Hi,
>
> what will happen if he will/can not change the license
problems?  
> Can somebody
> else can do this? Or will we ever live with that
problem?

Only the author can change the license. I will bug him some
more.

regards,
Lukas

-- 
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

Le Saturday 20 October 2007 20:05:41 Lukas Kahwe Smith, vous
avez écrit :
> On 20.10.2007, at 19:50, Frank Habermann wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > what will happen if he will/can not change the
license problems?  
> > Can somebody
> > else can do this? Or will we ever live with that
problem?
>
> Only the author can change the license. I will bug him
some more.

Are you sure ?

Based on license's clause:
  5. The PHP Group may publish revised and/or new versions
of the
     license from time to time. Each version will be given
a
     distinguishing version number.
     Once covered code has been published under a particular
version
     of the license, you may always continue to use it under
the terms
     of that version. You may also choose to use such
covered code
     under the terms of any subsequent version of the
license
     published by the PHP Group. No one other than the PHP
Group has
     the right to modify the terms applicable to covered
code created
     under this License.

My understading is then that any licencee may redistribute
the software under 
any subsequent licence published by the PHP group.
That's why I've uploaded a debian package one week ago:
  
http://ftp-master.debian.org/~ajt/n
ew/php-xml-htmlsax3_3.0.0~rc1-1_amd64.html

Of course, a clear relicensing from original author would be
nicer..


Romain
-- 
mama say
son, you've got to stay home today
there's a hole in the roof
you've got to make it waterproof

--
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

On 21.10.2007, at 14:25, Romain Beauxis wrote:

> Le Saturday 20 October 2007 20:05:41 Lukas Kahwe Smith,
vous avez  
> écrit :
>> On 20.10.2007, at 19:50, Frank Habermann wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> what will happen if he will/can not change the
license problems?
>>> Can somebody
>>> else can do this? Or will we ever live with
that problem?
>>
>> Only the author can change the license. I will bug
him some more.
>
> Are you sure ?
>
> Based on license's clause:
>   5. The PHP Group may publish revised and/or new
versions of the
>      license from time to time. Each version will be
given a
>      distinguishing version number.
>      Once covered code has been published under a
particular version
>      of the license, you may always continue to use it
under the terms
>      of that version. You may also choose to use such
covered code
>      under the terms of any subsequent version of the
license
>      published by the PHP Group. No one other than the
PHP Group has
>      the right to modify the terms applicable to
covered code created
>      under this License.
>
> My understading is then that any licencee may
redistribute the  
> software under
> any subsequent licence published by the PHP group.
> That's why I've uploaded a debian package one week
ago:
>
> http:/
/ftp-master.debian.org/~ajt/new/php-xml- 
> htmlsax3_3.0.0~rc1-1_amd64.html
>
> Of course, a clear relicensing from original author
would be nicer..

Uhm well I thought the issue is that its not clear what
license the  
code is released under. As a result its kinda hard to rely
on a  
specific license in order to get the right to relicense ..

regards,
Lukas

--
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

Le Sunday 21 October 2007 18:00:12 Lukas Kahwe Smith, vous
avez écrit :
> > Of course, a clear relicensing from original
author would be nicer..
>
> Uhm well I thought the issue is that its not clear what
license the  
> code is released under. As a result its kinda hard to
rely on a  
> specific license in order to get the right to relicense
..

Of course it's the issue.
But headers talk about two different licenses: they say,
basically:
"version 2.02 of PHP license, as stated at `link to
version 3`"

So I guess it's either one or the other, but the two have
this clause, so it 
should hold.

However, yes we need a proper relicensing.


Romain
-- 
Think the word peace means coming together ?
Peace is a diploma you get in the cementry
Seen ?
On top of your grave, that is marked:
"Here lies the body of John Strokes
Rest in Peace"
Seen ?
And I and I know many of you little brothers,
Who wouldn't like to hear your daughter say:
"Just going to give away a little peace"
A Bongo cliping ya no seen ?
So you can imagine how defective the word peace is,
Seen ?
- Peter Tosh - Live at One Live Peace Concert '78

--
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php

On 21.10.2007, at 19:27, Romain Beauxis wrote:

> Le Sunday 21 October 2007 18:00:12 Lukas Kahwe Smith,
vous avez  
> écrit :
>>> Of course, a clear relicensing from original
author would be nicer..
>>
>> Uhm well I thought the issue is that its not clear
what license the
>> code is released under. As a result its kinda hard
to rely on a
>> specific license in order to get the right to
relicense ..
>
> Of course it's the issue.
> But headers talk about two different licenses: they
say, basically:
> "version 2.02 of PHP license, as stated at `link
to version 3`"
>
> So I guess it's either one or the other, but the two
have this  
> clause, so it
> should hold.

ok .. i didnt remember that. so maybe just send rasmus a
quick email  
to get confirmation on this point (rasmusphp.net)
and then i guess  
we can go ahead and have this fixed.

regards,
Lukas

--
PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub
.php