On 24.05.2022 23:57, Steven Scott wrote:
The current version of 'bsts' is released under the LGPL. I want to add
the MIT license as an alternative.
Right now the DESCRIPTION file contains the line
License: LGPL-2.1 | file LICENSE
and the file LICENSE contains a copy of the LGPL.
The latter is not needed as the license file is part of R, so the
declaration is sufficient.
To add the MIT license I believe I need to modify it to be
License: LGPL-2.1 | MIT + file LICENSE | file LICENSE
You actually need
License: LGPL-2.1 | MIT + file LICENSE
where the LICENSE file contains the CRAN template for the MIT license only
Best,
Uwe Ligges
The syntax MIT + file LICENSE is because the MIT license is a template, and
I need to fill in the template parameters in the LICENSE file.
What's the right way to structure the LICENSE file to contain two
licenses? Should I have two files (MIT.LICENSE, LGPL.LICENSE)? Can I just
append the MIT license to the bottom of the LICENSE file?
Thank you for reading.
[[alternative HTML version deleted]]
______________________________________________
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
