Discussion:
phpmailer needs to be replaced
Sigurd Nes
2009-11-22 22:12:59 UTC
Permalink
phpmailer in which email depends on - seems to be GPLv2-only.

Anyone care to find (and implement) an alternative?

Regards

Sigurd
Maât
2009-11-23 07:44:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sigurd Nes
phpmailer in which email depends on - seems to be GPLv2-only.
Anyone care to find (and implement) an alternative?
Regards
Sigurd
Seems that it's LGPL without the version being detailed in the body of
the files.

And a license file LGPL v 2.1 is provided aside.

I dont think they would mind if we use v3 instead of v 2

I'm going to ask them : it's the shortest way to know about their point
of view

Maât
Maât
2009-11-23 08:48:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Maât
Post by Sigurd Nes
phpmailer in which email depends on - seems to be GPLv2-only.
Anyone care to find (and implement) an alternative?
Regards
Sigurd
Seems that it's LGPL without the version being detailed in the body of
the files.
And a license file LGPL v 2.1 is provided aside.
I dont think they would mind if we use v3 instead of v 2
I'm going to ask them : it's the shortest way to know about their point
of view
Maât
Well after digging a lilttle bit phpmailer is not a problem.

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#matrix-skip-target

we can use a lgpl v2.1 only library into a GPL v3 project.

We would need phpmailer guys authorization if we wanted to convert to
lgpl v3

plase note also that we could convert lgpl v2.1 to gpl v3 (not lgpl)
without needing to ask them : lgpl explicitly allows us to do so.

i'm still going to ask them because having all libraries under the same
lgpl v3 licence would be more logical and easier to understand for
everybody.

Regards,

Maât


PS : We could also move the phpmailer library from lgpl 2.1 only to lgpl
2.1 or later then move from lgpl v2.1 or later to lgpl v 3 or later but
we would need to publish somewhere these libraries as independant packages.
Loading...