[R-pkg-devel] Rules / etiquette: Fork package, modify and release to CRAN

[Chung-hong Chan]

I think I was in a similar situation (not exactly the same though).
The R package minty was a fork from the superseded code of the popular
R package readr.

Although legally speaking it is okay to fork and release open source
code, it would be much better to ask for permission from the origin
authors first before releasing it.
https://github.com/tidyverse/readr/issues/1517

As forking can sometimes be perceived as splitting up the community,
asking for permission shows that it's in good faith.


On Sun, Jul 19, 2026 at 5:01 PM Wollschlaeger, Daniel
<wollschlaeger using uni-mainz.de> wrote:
>
> Thank you very much, Dirk and Ivan, for quickly providing encouraging feedback!
>
> With respect to adopting the archived packages: That would indeed be ideal as it would provide most value to other users / developers. However, I hesitate for two reasons: First, taking over the packages strikes me as even more intrusive than forking them (maybe this is a temporary situation). Second, the functionality provided by the original packages is very broad, and really beyond my expertise (both with respect to C++ template code and math). A modified and trimmed-down package would be easier for me to understand and maintain.
>
> ________________________________________
> Von: Ivan Krylov <ikrylov using disroot.org>
> Gesendet: Sonntag, 19. Juli 2026 16:35:57
> An: Wollschlaeger, Daniel
> Cc: r-package-devel using r-project.org
> Betreff: Re: [R-pkg-devel] Rules / etiquette: Fork package, modify and release to CRAN
>
> On Sun, 19 Jul 2026 14:05:06 +0000
> "Wollschlaeger, Daniel" <wollschlaeger using uni-mainz.de> wrote:
>
> > My understanding is that the GPL-3 license of the packages allows me
> > to fork, modify, and release them to CRAN under a new name.
>
> Dirk is right. Since you're retaining the package functionality and
> API, it's even better to retain the name of the package. You're just
> taking over from where the original maintainer left off.
>
> According to the CRAN policy, it would be ideal to have the author's
> blessing for that, but not necessary:
>
> >> Package maintainers give the right to use that package name to CRAN
> >> when they submit, so the CRAN team may orphan a package and allow
> >> another maintainer to take it over.
>
>
> > Aside from <...> including him in the DESCRIPTION's Authors using R field
> > with roles 'aut' and 'cph'
>
> According to ?person in latest versions of R, 'aut' already implies
> holding the copyright. 'cph' is intended for entities "other than the
> package authors".
>
> Best of luck and thank you for doing the right thing!
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Ivan
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-package-devel using r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel