-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 37
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Replace deprecated Sensiolabs security checker #130
Conversation
I guess the line length PR (#128) needs to be merged first. |
@paras-malhotra Thanks for your willingness to contribute. Just out of interest: is there any particular reason why you've chosen to go with this tool instead of the recommended successor of the project: https://github.com/fabpot/local-php-security-checker ? |
Hi @jrfnl, Before I answer that question, let me tell you that I built the Enlightn security checker and the reasons I chose to build it over using the local php security checker are:
|
Thanks for your reply. Let's also see what the others have to say about the PR.
Just a side-note about this: tooling does not always have to have a compatible license to be used by a project. Just running the software by a non-AGPL app does not constitute a license violation AFAIK. |
@jrfnl here's a reference: https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/107883/agpl-what-you-can-do-and-what-you-cant#:~:text=2%20Answers&text=The%20AGPL%20is%20based%20on,but%20this%20is%20murky%20ground.
This seems that even if the code isn't modified, it will still have to be AGPL licensed. I'm in no way a legal export though, but I based my decision on this. |
I saw that, but I also read the license itself. Though, same as you, I'm not a lawyer (and I have seriously doubts whether the people who commented on stack exchange were....). |
Some specific points:
Yeah, my bad, it fell off my radar. (Thankfully @jrfnl has gently nudged it back into my sight again).
This statement is false. This project is merely a consumer of the product not the code. Our code can function 100% without the code, hence the licensing is irrelevant, from a consumer perspective. If we were to use the code things would be different.
I may have more experience in this, as I have done license management and compliance for several clients in the past. I am confident in my previous statement on this. Further thoughts:
I've opened #131 to come to a conclusion. |
I've discussed with @mjrider (and updated the related issue) and thus far the Enlightn security checker is the only candidate still standing. Unless @jrfnl has an opposing view, this is going to get merged. @paras-malhotra I've merged #128. Could you pull the changes and rebase you code? (That should fix the YAML Lint errors). On a side note, regarding a totally unrelated project, we're going to use your library to replace the Sensio lib in |
@Potherca that's awesome! I've merged the upstream changes, so this should be good to go. Thanks! |
Proposed Changes
Replaces the deprecated Sensiolabs security checker with the Enlightn security checker.