Chris, on C) even commercial packages have licenses. If the commercial
package contains a linkable software library, that license is very
important in this discussion, because it tells you (us) what you can do
with that library.
It may say that you can distribute binary code you build with that
library, or that you can link other proprietary software to it, or that
you can do neither of those things.
So the exact license of 'bar' is important to this discussion as well.
There are a number of R packages on CRAN that link to commercial
libraries or require a commercial library to be available (such as
optimization routines), but the exact license of the commercial library
needs to be known, and the desired behavior needs to be permitted.
Regards,
Brian
On 01/19/2018 04:19 AM, Chris Brien wrote:
Hi Stefan,
Here are the answers:
A) No, I am simply calling routines.
B) By proprietary I mean that it is a commercial package.
C) No, it seemed better to use short, distinctive names for the two packages
and to focus on the essential issues, namely that `bar' is a commercial package
and that `foo' is not.
Thanks for your interest.
Cheers,
Chris
From: stefan.mckinnon.edwa...@gmail.com
[mailto:stefan.mckinnon.edwa...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Stefan McKinnon
Høj-Edwards
Sent: Friday, 19 January 2018 7:58 PM
To: Chris Brien
Cc: r-package-devel@r-project.org
Subject: Re: [R-pkg-devel] Licensing of an R package
Hi Chris,
Just for clarification, there are at least two aspects that affect how you can
license your package.
A) Do you distribute `bar` with your package, or are you simply calling
routines in `bar`?
B) What is the exact license of `bar`?
C) Is there a reason for this secrecy of `bar`? If we knew what it was,
somebody on this list might have experience with it or similar.
If `bar` is not freely available, it doesn't seem your package would be
accepted to CRAN (do correct me if I am wrong).
Kindly,
Stefan McKinnon Hoj-Edwards
Stefan McKinnon Høj-Edwards
ph.d. Genetics
+44 (0)776 231 2464
+45 2888 6598
Skype: stefan_edwards
2018-01-19 8:31 GMT+00:00 Chris Brien <chris.br...@unisa.edu.au>:
Dear list members,
I have come to realize that my understanding of free software licensing was
somewhat naïve. The problem is that I now find that, in spite of spending quite
a bit of time reading about various licenses on the web, I have been unable to
identify a suitable license for the situation that I have with one of my
packages.
I am solely responsible for the development of my package, `foo' say. However,
most functions in `foo' call functions from a proprietary package, `bar' say ,
the latter not being available from an online software repository and
consisting of R functions that call routines in a library. That is, `foo'
enhances `bar'.
I had thought that a GPL licence was appropriate because (1) `foo' is free
software and (ii) I do not distribute `bar' with `foo'. That is, I am
distributing only free software. However, I have come to understand that this
is not the case because a free software package linked with a proprietary
package does not satisfy the requirements to be GPL.
I have found it difficult to work out a license that might cover my package
because much of the discussion online covers cases that are the opposite of
mine i.e. cases where `foo' is proprietary and `bar' is freeware. I can
appreciate why this needs to be avoided.
I can also understand that a disadvantage of what I am doing is that it tends
to entrench the use of such software. While I agree that it is desirable that
`bar' be replaced with free software, unfortunately `bar' has functionality
that is currently infeasible to replace with free software. At least I am not
profiting from the enhancements that I have made.
I am hoping that someone more experienced in software development and licensing
issues can suggest a license type that might be suitable for `foo' such that at
least the enhancements that it incorporates remain `free'?
Cheers,
Chris Brien
Adjunct Senior Lecturer in Statistics
-----
Phenomics and Bioinformatics Research Centre
University of South Australia
GPO Box 2471
ADELAIDE 5001 South Australia
Phone: +61 8 8302 5535 Fax: +61 8 8302 5785
Email: chris.br...@unisa.edu.au
WEB page: <http://people.unisa.edu.au/Chris.Brien>
CRICOS No 00121B
______________________________________________
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
______________________________________________
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
--
Brian G. Peterson
http://braverock.com/brian/
Ph: 773-459-4973
IM: bgpbraverock
______________________________________________
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
