Licenses on Submissions to CRAN

[Friedrich Leisch]

>>>>> On 02 Feb 1998 13:37:32 -0600,
>>>>> Douglas Bates (DB) wrote:

DB> Friedrich Leisch <Friedrich.Leisch@ci.tuwien.ac.at> writes:
>> So is it ok if we change the above to something like
>> 
>> **********************************************************
>> 
>> Package: e1071
>> Version: 0.7-3
>> Author: Compiled by Fritz Leisch <Friedrich.Leisch@ci.tuwien.ac.at>.
>> Description: Miscellaneous functions used at the Department of
>> Statistics at TU Wien (E1071). 
>> License: GPL
>> 
>> **********************************************************

DB> I hate to be picky ...

Better than being sloppy like me :-)

DB> but I think it would be better to have it a bit
DB> more complete as in 

DB> License: GPL version 2 or later

Ok

>> or is it better if we use the keyword `Copying'?

DB> I think License is better than Copying.

Ok


>> I also want to complile a list of known Licenses:
>> 
>> GPL
>> BSD
>> Artistic
>> 
>> These (and similar ones) are what Debian considers `free'.


>> How should we treat the rest? Providing some more keywords or have
>> people explain it in detail in the DESCRIPTION file?

DB> We might use a general phrase followed by a reference to the
DB> DESCRIPTION file.  For example

DB> License: Free for non-commercial use.  See the file DESCRIPTION for details.


Well, now I hate to be picky ... but that is a neverending loop
... the License statement is in the file DESCRIPTION ... so we'll
change that to

  License: Free for non-commercial use.  See the file COPYING for details


Best,
Fritz
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !)  To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._