* Julian Rüth [2014-02-24 22:28:37 +0100]:
> * Volker Braun [2014-02-24 13:15:25 -0800]:
>
> > Did you open a ticket for that?
> Not yet. I do not have access to trac from this machine. I can create a
> ticket later today.
This is now http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/15858
julian
pgpB7EdVu_6kX
On Feb 24, 2014 2:15 PM, "Volker Braun" wrote:
>
> Is there actually somebody that replaces half a dozen libraries with
almost decade-old versions and then uses that to run/develop Sage? It might
have been possible back then, but it sure sounds extremely unlikely now.
>
>
Nope, nobody does that n
Is there actually somebody that replaces half a dozen libraries with almost
decade-old versions and then uses that to run/develop Sage? It might have
been possible back then, but it sure sounds extremely unlikely now.
On Monday, February 24, 2014 10:37:18 PM UTC+1, William wrote:
>
> On Mon, F
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Volker Braun wrote:
> IMHO GPLv3+ is the recommended license by the FSF. What exactly is there to
> fix?
The Sage developers decided when GPL3 was coming out (years ago) to
keep the library GPLv2+ compatible, but the distribution has to be
GPLv3 due to the FSF sw
* Volker Braun [2014-02-24 13:15:25 -0800]:
> Did you open a ticket for that?
Not yet. I do not have access to trac from this machine. I can create a
ticket later today.
julian
pgpjxOBzubZ8e.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Did you open a ticket for that?
On Monday, February 24, 2014 9:46:38 PM UTC+1, Julian Rüth wrote:
>
> You're right. But there are actually a few:
>
> plot/plot3d/transform.pyx
> combinat/words/words.py
> combinat/words/word_options.py
> combinat/words/word_infinite_datatypes.py
> combinat/wo
On Monday, February 24, 2014 8:34:25 PM UTC+1, William wrote:
>
> However, there is Cython code in the core library that relies on GSL,
> and GSL is GPLv3+.I don't think this forces the Sage library to be
> GPLv3+, since there is also a GPLv2+ version of GSL with the *same
> API*, which we u
* Jeroen Demeyer [2014-02-24 21:37:23 +0100]:
> On 2014-02-24 21:32, Julian Rüth wrote:
> >In many places we have GPLv2 (without the +)
> I hope not, that would be a big problem.
You're right. But there are actually a few:
plot/plot3d/transform.pyx
combinat/words/words.py
combinat/words/word_opt
On 2014-02-24 21:32, Julian Rüth wrote:
In many places we have GPLv2 (without the +)
I hope not, that would be a big problem.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
* Volker Braun [2014-02-24 12:20:43 -0800]:
> IMHO GPLv3+ is the recommended license by the FSF. What exactly is there to
> fix?
In many places we have GPLv2 (without the +). GPLv3+ is incompatible
with GPLv2 (http://gplv3.fsf.org/wiki/index.php/Compatible_licenses).
julian
pgpjF7vfst4ln.pgp
D
IMHO GPLv3+ is the recommended license by the FSF. What exactly is there to
fix?
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegrou
On 2014-02-24 20:42, Julian Rüth wrote:
./rings/number_field/splitting_field.py
This code is mine can be released under the GPL v2 also. I simply copied
the copyright statement from the new developer's manual (the one which
was changed from "version 2 or later" to "version 3 or later").
Jeroe
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 11:42 AM, Julian Rüth wrote:
> * William Stein [2014-02-24 11:34:25 -0800]:
>> Thus I find no code in the core Sage library that is GPLv3(+).
> I found these three matches:
> $ grep -r "version 3" .
> ./schemes/toric/points.py:# as published by the Free Software Foundatio
* William Stein [2014-02-24 11:34:25 -0800]:
> Thus I find no code in the core Sage library that is GPLv3(+).
I found these three matches:
$ grep -r "version 3" .
./schemes/toric/points.py:# as published by the Free Software Foundation;
either version 3 of
./rings/number_field/splitting_field.py
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 11:18 AM, Volker Braun wrote:
> Without any spelunking on sage-devel, as GPLv3+ is a subset of GPLv2+ all
> you need is find a source file that claims specifically GPLv3+. I'm at a
> conference right now and haven't done the grep exercise, but I'm pretty sure
> that will be
Without any spelunking on sage-devel, as GPLv3+ is a subset of GPLv2+ all
you need is find a source file that claims specifically GPLv3+. I'm at a
conference right now and haven't done the grep exercise, but I'm pretty
sure that will be easy to find.
On Monday, February 24, 2014 3:39:15 PM UT
On 2/24/14 9:01 AM, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
Sage-the-distribution is GPL v3 only. This is the only license which is
compatible with all components of Sage.
IIRC, that is because some components are licensed as GPL 2 or 3, while
others are GPLv3+, right?
Thanks,
Jason
--
You received this me
On Monday, 24 February 2014 15:57:23 UTC+1, Georg S. Weber wrote:
>
> Uh oh. Splendid. License discussion (again).
>
> Since "GPL v3+" is not compatible with "GPL v2" (without "+"), a change
> from GPL v2+ to GPL v3+ would mean a change to a more restrictive license.
>
> IIRC, Sage-the-library a
On 2014-02-24 15:57, Georg S. Weber wrote:
IIRC, Sage-the-library always was intended to be "GPL v2+", while
Sage-the-distribution might have incorporated "GPL v3+" parts by now,
but note that IIRC Singular has a license "either GPL v2 or GPL v3"
which would rule out something as a (not existing
Uh oh. Splendid. License discussion (again).
Since "GPL v3+" is not compatible with "GPL v2" (without "+"), a change
from GPL v2+ to GPL v3+ would mean a change to a more restrictive license.
IIRC, Sage-the-library always was intended to be "GPL v2+", while
Sage-the-distribution might have inco
On 2/24/14 8:26 AM, Volker Braun wrote:
AFAIK it is GPL v3+, there should be some old discussion on sage-devel
IIRC, it is GPL v2+. I'd be interested in seeing the discussion you
reference.
Jason
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" gr
21 matches
Mail list logo