Re: Relicensing - was - meaning of Php.XPath license?

[Nigel S. <nig...@us...>]

> The MPL/GPL/LGPL triple seems a solution
>   to me, to relicense existing versions
> from MPL to LGPL/GPL without breaking
> the rules of MPL.
>
> Does anybody of the developers has an
> argument why to publish future versions
> under MPL at all? But yes. It is
> certainly the widest range.

MPL is even less restrictive than LGPL from my reading... so the triple
seems to make the code even more accessible.  I also feel less worried about
adding GPL/LGPL to the MPL license rather than converting the MPL to a
GPL/LGPL.

> I thank very much you for your decision.
> I think we can wait a fortnight to
> publish the next minor version of COOL.
> I try to run it with 3.2 then.

"Greg's bugs" might delay the next version... but the next version will have
the new license when ever we get round to it...

:o)

Nigel