Le Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 03:32:01PM +, Mattia Rizzolo a écrit :
>
> Still, I think the way the R project distributes MIT-licensed stuff is
> not ok.
Hi Mattia,
the R packages distributed on the Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN) are
uploaded there by their own authors, therefore I think
Mattia Rizzolo writes:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 06:10:57AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> > This issue should be resolved by the upstream distributor, as I
> > agree with you that they are not compliant with the conditions of
> > the license. You may want to have that discussion
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 06:10:57AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> This issue should be resolved by the upstream distributor, as I agree
> with you that they are not compliant with the conditions of the license.
> You may want to have that discussion with them.
I wonder how to contact R people, I've
Mattia Rizzolo writes:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 07:52:18AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> > Mattia Rizzolo writes:
> >
> > > What I'm saying is that IMHO the only license requirement (the
> > > second paragraph of it that you reported above, about including
>
[you forgot to CC me on this, anyway, I temporarly subscribed d-legal@]
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 07:52:18AM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> Mattia Rizzolo writes:
>
> > Yes, I see how the MIT license is DFSG-free. What I'm saying is that
> > IMHO the only license requirement (the
Mattia Rizzolo writes:
> Yes, I see how the MIT license is DFSG-free. What I'm saying is that
> IMHO the only license requirement (the second paragraph of it that you
> reported above, about including the copyright notice *and* the
> permission notice in any copy of the
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 04:28:30PM +1100, Ben Finney wrote:
> Mattia Rizzolo writes:
> > Based on http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
> >
> > This is a template. Complete and ship as file LICENSE the following 2
> > lines (only)
> >
> > YEAR:
> > COPYRIGHT HOLDER:
> >
> > and
Mattia Rizzolo writes:
> So, today I discovered [0] that R-project has some polices regarding
> licenses [1]. In particular they have one regarding the MIT license
> [2]. This needs to go together with their extensions manuals [3].
>
> Read together they say that if you have
Mattia Rizzolo writes:
> [ please CC me as I'm not in d-legal@ ]
Done.
> So, today I discovered [0] that R-project has some polices regarding
> licenses [1]. In particular they have one regarding the MIT license
> [2]. This needs to go together with their extensions
On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 12:07:06PM -0400, Paul R. Tagliamonte wrote:
> FWIW, I've been rejecting them where I see them. Mind filing serious bugs
> on those 11?
Incidentally I have sponsored one of those this morning (assuming it was
fine given that I found so many examples in the archive), and
FWIW, I've been rejecting them where I see them. Mind filing serious bugs
on those 11?
Paul
On Mar 20, 2016 11:32 AM, "Mattia Rizzolo" wrote:
> [ please CC me as I'm not in d-legal@ ]
>
> So, today I discovered [0] that R-project has some polices regarding
> licenses [1]. In
11 matches
Mail list logo