MIT is more permissive than GPL2, so there is a collision there. But you may be able to work it out with the author?
On June 2, 2021 10:36:00 AM PDT, Ben Staton <stato...@gmail.com> wrote: >My package uses the MIT license, so would that not meet the >compatibility >requirements? > >I will attempt to reach out to the package author - thanks for your >help! > >On Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 10:31 AM Ben Bolker <bbol...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> That all sounds exactly right. >> GPL >= 2 allows you to use the material without asking permission >as >> long as your package is compatibly licensed (e.g. also GPL). >> Under normal circumstances it would be polite to ask permission, >but >> if the reason for doing this is that the maintainer is unreachable in >> the first place ... >> >> If you want to try a little harder, it seems quite possible that >you >> can reach the matrixcalc maintainer at the (personal) e-mail address >> shown in this page: >> >> >https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10208324530363130&set=ecnf.1000413042 >> >> (Possibly an identity confusion, but I rate that as unlikely based >on >> other facebook snooping) >> >> I don't think a short, polite e-mail request would be out of >bounds, >> they can always ignore it or tell you to go away. >> >> cheers >> Ben Bolker >> >> On 6/2/21 1:15 PM, Ben Staton wrote: >> > Hello, >> > >> > Thank you for your detailed list of solutions. >> > >> > I was initially tempted to go with option 1 (move matrixcalc to >suggests >> > and check for its existence before using functions that rely on >it), but >> as >> > mentioned, this is not a long term fix. >> > >> > I unfortunately can't take on the responsibilities of option 2 >(becoming >> > the package maintainer) -- there is much that this package does >that I do >> > not understand, and do not wish to feign authority! >> > >> > I plan to take option 3 (copy the needed functions into my >package). >> There >> > are only three functions I need from matrixcalc, and all three are >fairly >> > simple (is.square.matrix >> > <https://rdrr.io/cran/matrixcalc/src/R/is.square.matrix.R>, >> > is.symmetric.matrix >> > <https://rdrr.io/cran/matrixcalc/src/R/is.symmetric.matrix.R>, and >> > is.positive.definite >> > <https://rdrr.io/cran/matrixcalc/src/R/is.positive.definite.R>) and >> there >> > is only one function in postpack that needs them. I plan to define >them >> > within the postpack function. matrixcalc is licensed under GPL >= 2 >and >> > based on my scan of the license text, this is allowed. Is that >correct? >> > >> > Regarding option 4 (contacting the matrixcalc maintainer), the >original >> > email from CRAN mentioned that they have attempted to contact the >package >> > author with no response. >> > >> > Thank you! >> > >> > On Wed, Jun 2, 2021 at 9:52 AM J C Nash <profjcn...@gmail.com> >wrote: >> > >> >> I just downloaded the source matrixcalc package to see what it >> contained. >> >> The functions >> >> I looked at seem fairly straightforward and the OP could likely >develop >> >> equivalent features >> >> in his own code, possibly avoiding a function call. Avoiding the >> function >> >> call means NAMESPACE etc. are not involved, so fewer places for >getting >> >> into >> >> trouble, assuming the inline code works properly. >> >> >> >> JN >> >> >> >> >> >> On 2021-06-02 12:37 p.m., Duncan Murdoch wrote: >> >>> On 02/06/2021 12:13 p.m., Ben Staton wrote: >> >>>> Hello, >> >>>> >> >>>> I received an email notice from CRAN indicating that my R >package >> >>>> ('postpack') will be archived soon if I do not take any action >and I >> >> want >> >>>> to avoid that outcome. The issue is not caused by my package, >but >> >> instead a >> >>>> package that my package depends on: >> >>>> >> >>>> "... package 'matrixcalc' is now scheduled for archival on >2021-06-09, >> >>>> and archiving this will necessitate also archiving its strong >reverse >> >>>> dependencies." >> >>>> >> >>>> Evidently, xyz has been returning errors on new R builds >prompting >> CRAN >> >> to >> >>>> list it as a package to be archived. My package, 'postpack' has >> >>>> 'matrixcalc' listed in the Imports field, which I assume is why >I >> >> received >> >>>> this email. >> >>>> >> >>>> I want to keep 'postpack' active and don't want it to be >archived. I >> >> still >> >>>> need package 'matrixcalc' for my package, but not for most >functions. >> >> Could >> >>>> I simply move package 'matrixcalc' to the Suggests list and >submit the >> >> new >> >>>> version to CRAN to remove the "Strong Reverse Dependency" issue >that >> >>>> triggered this email to avoid CRAN from archiving my package? >> >>> >> >>> That's part of one solution, but not the best solution. >> >>> >> >>> If you move it to Suggests, you should make sure that your >package >> >> checks for it before every use, and falls back to >> >>> some other calculation if it is not present. Be aware that once >it is >> >> archived, almost none of your users will have it >> >>> available, so this is kind of like dropping the functions that it >> >> supports. >> >>> >> >>> Another solution which would be great for the community might be >for >> you >> >> to offer to take over as maintainer of >> >>> matrixcalc. Then you'd fix whatever problems it has, and you >wouldn't >> >> need to worry about it. I haven't looked at the >> >>> issues so I don't know if this is feasible. >> >>> >> >>> A third choice would be for you to copy the functions you need >from >> >> matrixcalc into your own package so you can drop the >> >>> dependency. This is generally legal under the licenses that CRAN >> >> accepts, but you should check anyway. >> >>> >> >>> A fourth choice would be for you to contact the matrixcalc >maintainer, >> >> and help them to fix the issues so that >> >>> matrixcalc doesn't get archived. They may or may not be willing >to >> work >> >> with you. >> >>> >> >>> I'd say my third choice is the best choice in the short term, and >2nd >> or >> >> 4th would be good long term solutions. >> >>> >> >>> Duncan Murdoch >> >>> >> >>> ______________________________________________ >> >>> R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list >> >>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel >> >> >> > >> > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] >> > >> > ______________________________________________ >> > R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list >> > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel >> > >> >> ______________________________________________ >> R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list >> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel >> > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] > >______________________________________________ >R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list >https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel -- Sent from my phone. Please excuse my brevity. ______________________________________________ R-package-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-package-devel