A package can have one or more licneses, but they have to apply to the
whole package, otehrwise the componentes havbe to be distributed separately.
Also note that CRAN accepts FOSS licenses. This sounds like a case that
CRAN will not agree to distribute the (non FOSS) binaries.
Best,
Uwe Ligges
On 24.07.2021 18:14, Russell Almond wrote:
This is related to my previous technical question, but really is a
question about CRAN policy.
I'm currently the maintainer of the RNetica package
(https://github.com/ralmond/RNetica) which provides an R binding for the
C API of the Netica Bayes net library (https://norsys.com). The Netica
library is available in both a "student" and "professional" version, the
difference being a license code available from Norsys. The student
version is sufficiently functional to run the test suite and to be used
for educational purposes. Installing the package from github installs
the student version, which can be converted to a professional version by
purchasing a license code.
In the past, Norsys has been fine with me distributing binaries which
included the Netica code (but not the license keys), and I'm sure that
they would be okay with CRAN distributing student-mode binaries as well.
Currently, the source version will download the Netica API kit from
the Norsys web site and install Netica (still working out one or two
technical glitches).
What are the policy issues associated with distributing this package
through CRAN? My own code is licensed under the Artistic license (which
is CRAN compatible), but the 3rd party shared library has a different
license from Netica. Can I distribute RNetica through CRAN or am I
stuck with a github-only distribution.
Thanks for your assistance.
--Russell Almond
______________________________________________
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
