Thanks Jake! I'll also ask if they are willing to participate in the Julia community by implementing a Julia version too! :)
On Sunday, March 23, 2014 6:14:33 PM UTC-7, Jake Bolewski wrote: > > Another strategy is to contact the authors directly and ask them if they > would consider relicensing their work. Many people do not really consider > the implications of choosing one license over another and just go with a > default. > > On Sunday, March 23, 2014 8:59:58 PM UTC-4, John Myles White wrote: >> >> Yes, including the same GPL-3 license is sufficient if you’ve derived >> your work from a GPL-3 project. You may also need to include the original >> headers of the files if they contain attribution information that you are >> required to preserve. >> >> I don’t think there’s anything dishonest about creating a GPL-3 package. >> If you would like to release something under a permissive license, you’ll >> have to implement your code from scratch without ever reading any of the >> code from a GPL or closed-source implementation. >> >> What’s most beneficial depends on context. Many businesses prohibit GPL >> software, so many people in the Julia (and Python) communities >> intentionally produce MIT or BSD software. But Julia benefits a lot from >> having GPL packages when there’s no reasonable alternative. >> >> — John >> >> On Mar 23, 2014, at 1:17 PM, Ted Fujimoto <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> I'm trying to familiarize myself with Julia by seeing how it compares to >> other languages. I would also like to "open-source" my code if it seems >> useful to others. Unfortunately, licenses have made this process >> complicated. >> >> A tangible example: >> >> I am trying to implement a Julia version of the R package pcalg ( >> http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/pcalg/index.html). Like most R >> packages, it is protected under the >> GPL-3<http://cran.r-project.org/web/licenses/GPL-3> license. >> Also, the license states that it would consider my implementation a >> "modification" of the R package. Say I feel that my project is ready to be >> open-sourced and put it in a github repository. Is it enough to follow the >> RmathDist.jl <https://github.com/JuliaStats/RmathDist.jl> lead and do >> the following?: >> 1. Include the same license in the repository. >> 2. Cite the R package I modified. >> >> A more long term question: I'm guessing a better (and more honest) >> alternative to the above would be to implement the relevant algorithms by >> looking at the pseudocode and applying it in a way that is friendlier to >> future improvements using idiomatic Julia (if it exists yet). After that, >> open-source it under the MIT license. Would this be a more beneficial >> approach than the "Julia version of an R package" approach? >> >> >>
