PHPStan composer license: MIT or GPL ?

I dont think that this is correct. You cant extend (what you will mostly do when writing anything "custom" for it) gpl code without getting a GPL stamp on your software. That is the whole idea of stallmans code freedom/copyleft. If you are only "using" it you have to be really careful. A DI container is somewhat different to most packages because you actually just use it.

> The license requires you to release source code of that library

You dont have to release the code to the open public. But you have to release the code to the owner(!) who really owns that software. Its about ownership not about public open source code. In the DI context you dont have to publish instances you inject but if there is some custom factory which extends something from nette this is GPL code.

> If GPL was enforceable in a way that you suggest then most games would have been open source as I assume most modern shops use open-source software

If people choose the wrong license and choose to work with the wrong packages they should be punished. They make bucks with other peoples work who decided to stick to GPL. You have to respect these developers. There is no "fuck you" when they said they dont what the http://www.wtfpl.net/

/r/PHP Thread Parent