Thank you very much for all the feedback. I will think about carefully.
All the best, Mauricio -- ===================================== Linux user #454569 -- Ubuntu user #17469 ===================================== "If you torture any data set long enough, it will confess anything!" (Murray Lark) On 05/03/13, Duncan Murdoch <murdoch.dun...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 03/05/2013 11:31 AM, Mauricio Zambrano-Bigiarini wrote: > >On 03/05/13 16:56, Simon Urbanek wrote: > >> > >> On May 3, 2013, at 10:34 AM, Mauricio Zambrano-Bigiarini wrote: > >> > >>> Dear list, > >>> > >>> For the maintainer of a given package, is it possible to change the > >>> licence of a it from GPL >= 2 to GPL >= 3 ? > >>> > >> > >> In general the maintainer has no such rights. However, if the maintainer > >> is also the author and holds all copyright, he can release the package > >> under any license he feels fit. What has been already released cannot be > >> affected, obviously, but you can release a new version under a different > >> license if you have the legal right to do so. > > > >Thank you very much Duncan and Simon for your replies. > > > >The package I'm asking about has 1 author [aut] (me) and 1 contributor > >[ctb] in the 'Author' field of the DESCRIPTION file. Both of them hold > >the copyright of the package. > > > >In case we want to change the licence. Do the 2 authors write something > >particular in the next submission to CRAN ? > >Do we need to provide some written document to CRAN ? > > > > > >What Duncan means with > >"If you are distributing the package on CRAN, you'll have to ask them > >whether they'll still choose to distribute your package after the change" > > > >May CRAN to decide not to distribute the package because of the change > >in the licence ? > > You'll have to ask them that. > > > > > >> > >> (This is not related to the possibility, but one practical problem with > >> requiring GPL >=3 is that it is not GPL-2 compatible so it's a decision > >> that better be made very consciously with all the consequences in mind). > > > >If the package we are talking about is pure R code, with only some > >dependencies to other R packages, what are the implications of: > > > >" one practical problem with requiring GPL >=3 is that it is not GPL-2 > >compatible" > > It may mean that one of your users won't be able to use the package, for > example if something else that they need requires GPL-2 licensing. > > Duncan Murdoch ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
