License status of CRAN packages

Kjetil Halvorsen writes:
On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Ben Goodrich <goodrich at fas.harvard.edu>wrote:
Dirk Eddelbuettel <edd <at> debian.org> writes:
As a non-exhautive list with possible misclassifications, cran2deb
currently
has these packasges as 'maybe not free' and does not build them:

     BARD,BayesDA,CoCo,ConvCalendar,FAiR,PTAk,RScaLAPACK,Rcsdp,SDDA,SGP,

 BayesDA has
   License:       GPL version 2 or any later version
what is unclear about that?
Nothing, although the spec is not canonical as per R-exts, see
http://www.r-project.org/nosvn/R.check/r-devel-linux-ix86/BayesDA-00check.html:

* checking DESCRIPTION meta-information ... NOTE
Non-standard license specification:
GPL version 2 or any later version
Standardizable: TRUE
Standardized license specification:
GPL (>= 2)

But as I wrote, the new code in 2.9.0 standardizes when it can ...

-k
Kjetil

alphahull,ash,asypow,caMassClass,gpclib,mapproj,matlab,mclust,mclust02,

mlbench,optmatch,rankreg,realized,rngwell19937,rtiff,rwt,scagnostics,
     sgeostat,spatialkernel,tlnise,xgobi
Small point: FAiR is free. The file LICENSE thing just clarifies that most
of
the code is AGPL but a couple files can't be included under the AGPL and
are
plain GPL. As far as I can see, R does not give me the option of saying so
in a
"standard" way, e.g. putting License: AGPL (>= 3) in the DESCRIPTION file
would
only be 95% accurate and putting License: AGPL (>= 3) | GPL (>= 3) is
misleading.

Ben

______________________________________________
R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]

______________________________________________
R-devel at r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel

License status of CRAN packages

Thread (20 messages)