To clarify:
A packae must be single under a single license or a license and
alternative licenes.
You cannot have 2 licenses at the same time, hence ou have to relicense
anyway. Of course, you have to check whether the licneses allow for it
or seek confirmation from all copyright holders.
If that (relicensing) is nt possible, you cannpt bundle such software
components in a single package.
Best,
Uwe Ligges
On 31.08.2023 17:04, Iñaki Ucar wrote:
About licensing,
On Sun, 27 Aug 2023 at 17:30, SHIMA Tatsuya <ts1s1a...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Ivan, thanks for taking the time to look at all the details of this.
> You licensed the package as MIT. Are your dependencies compatible
with MIT? All direct dependencies of your Rust code seem to be licensed
under either MIT or Apache-2.0, which seems to be compatible.
I am not a legal expert, but as you have seen all of prqlr's dependent crates
are compatible with the MIT license, and I interpret this to mean that there is
no problem distributing anything containing them under the MIT license.
No, that's not what "compatibility" means. You cannot just take n
pieces of software, bundle them, and release them under a license of
your choice (unless their licenses enable you to do so via some
re-licensing clause, like the Artistic-2.0 license does).
That's not the case here. By licensing your package as MIT, you are
violating the terms of the Apache-2.0 license, because I assume that
you are not modifying those dependencies at all. So your work should
be both MIT and Apache-2.0 (and others, should they exist, and
provided they are compatible).
Best,
______________________________________________
R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel
