Patrick made all the points that I was going to make (thanks, Patrick), but I wanted to reinforce one point that may be the source of the confusion: ParallelR is not a modified version of R: ParallelR is a suite of ordinary R packages that run on top of the R engine like any other package. The R code and Python code in these packages were written entirely by REvolution Computing staff (including Patrick), and do not contain any code (derived or otherwise) from the R project.
In retrospect, the name ParallelR may be somewhat confusing in this sense... # David Smith On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 7:40 AM, Patrick Shields <p...@revolution-computing.com> wrote: > I'm Pat Shields, one of the software engineers working on ParallelR. I just > wanted to make two points: no R code or previously gpl'd code can be found > in any of the non-gpl packages in ParallelR. I'm sure that the phrase > "derived works" is a legally subtle one, but all these packages include are > R and occasionally python scripts (as well as the standard text > documentation). If these are derived works, doesn't that mean that any R > code is also, by extension, required to be GPL'd? If not, is it including > these scripts in a package that forces the use of the GPL? > > Also, I'm confused about your dimissal of the MCE example. If that code was > a derivative work of R, how could it swap a GPL license for the BSD? I > didn't think such a switch was possible. If it was, I'd imagine a lot more > use of it, as a quick front project could make GPL software into BSD > software after which all changes could go on behind closed doors. > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 7:38 PM, Matthew Dowle <mdo...@mdowle.plus.com>wrote: > >> Dear R-devel, >> >> REvolution appear to be offering ParallelR only when bundled with their R >> Enterprise edition. As such it appears to be non-free and closed source. >> http://www.revolution-computing.com/products/parallel-r.php >> >> Since R is GPL and not LGPL, is this a breach of the GPL ? >> >> Below is the "GPL and ParallelR" thread from their R forum. >> >> mdowle > It appears that ParallelR (packages foreach and iterators) is >> only available bundled with the Enterprise edition. Since R is GPL, and >> ParallelR is derived from R, should ParallelR not also be GPL? Regards, >> Matthew >> >> revolution > Hello Matthew, ParallelR consists of both proprietary and GPL >> packages. The randomForest and snow libraries GPL licensed, whereas the >> other libraries we include have a commercial license(including 'foreach' and >> 'iterators'). Stephen Weller >> >> revolution > I wanted to expand on Stephen's reply. ParallelR is a suite of >> R packages, and it is well established that packages can be under a >> difference license than R itself (i.e. not the GPL). For example, package >> MCE is licensed under BSD, RColorBrewer is licensed under Apache, most of >> Bioconductor is under the Artistic license and some are under completely >> unique licenses (e.g. mclust). REvolution Computing developed all of the >> code in ParallelR (except for the bundled GPL packages Stephen mentions), >> and we decided to release it under our own license in REvolution R >> Enterprise. >> That said, we do already release components of parallelR, such as the >> underlying engine, Networkspaces (also written by REvolution Computing) >> under an open source licence. Also, we are likely to release some other >> components including foreach and iterators, to CRAN soon. >> David Smith >> Director of Community, REvolution Computing >> >> mdowle > The examples you give (MCE, RColorBrewer, Bioconductor) are all >> available for free including the source code. Their licenses have been >> approved by the FSF. Free software and open source are the terms of work >> derived from GPL licensed software. REvolution's packages 'foreach' and >> 'iterators' are neither free or open source. Can you provide a precedent >> for proprietary closed-source packages for R ? Is your policy approved by >> the FSF ? >> I don't object to REvolution. I am a fan of you making money from training >> courses, consultancy, support and binaries. These are all permitted by the >> GPL. However the GPL does not allow you to distribute work derived from R >> which is either closed source or non-free. >> R is GPL, not LGPL. >> The above is my personal understanding. I am now posting to r-devel to >> check, feel free to join the public debate there. >> >> Regards, Matthew >> >> [[alternative HTML version deleted]] >> >> ______________________________________________ >> R-devel@r-project.org mailing list >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel >> > > > > -- > Pat Shields > Software Engineer > REvolution Computing > One Century Tower | 265 Church Street, Suite 1006 > New Haven, CT 06510 > P: 203-777-7442 x250 | www.revolution-computing.com > > Check out our upcoming events schedule at > www.revolution-computing.com/events > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] > > ______________________________________________ > R-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel > -- David M Smith <da...@revolution-computing.com> Director of Community, REvolution Computing www.revolution-computing.com Tel: +1 (206) 577-4778 x3203 (San Francisco, USA) Check out our upcoming events schedule at www.revolution-computing.com/events ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
