Ricardo Wurmus writes: > Roel Janssen <r...@gnu.org> writes: > >> Ricardo Wurmus writes: >> >>> Roel Janssen <r...@gnu.org> writes: >>> >>>> Roel Janssen writes: >>>> >>>>> Ricardo Wurmus writes: >>>>> >>>>>> Roel Janssen <r...@gnu.org> writes: >>>>>>> + (description "This package provides a shared resource interface >>>>>>> for the >>>>>>> +bigmemory and synchronicity packages.") >>>>>>> + (license (list license:lgpl3 license:asl2.0)))) >>>>>> >>>>>> What does this list mean? >>>>>> Also: is this LGPL3+ or LGPL3 only? >>>>> >>>>> The CRAN page lists LGPL3 explicitly, but that could be imprecise ... >>>>> The source code package does not contain any other license indication >>>>> than waht is stated in the DESCRIPTION file (which states LGPL3 and >>>>> Apache Software License 2.0). >>>>> >>>>> See: >>>>> https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/bigmemory.sri/ >>>>> >>>>> So, I think the only thing I can do is just follow what has been stated, >>>>> which is LGPL3 (precisely this) and Apache Software License 2.0. >>>> >>>> I don't know how to proceed now. I think it's fine as the list of >>>> licenses is the list of licenses they provide. >>>> >>>> Are these licenses incompatible? If so, then there's nothing I can do >>>> either, because these are the licenses that are provided.. >>> >>> Usually, what we do for R is to assume “or later” because that’s how >>> things are usually done on CRAN. (They also automatically expand >>> license declarations.) >> >> Well I don't think we can do that in this case because that's not what >> the license field says. In the code there's no license at all, so that >> makes it even more difficult. > > You’re right. I misremembered. It’s only these joint license > declarations like “GPL-2 | GPL-3” that effectively mean “or later”. (It > is impossible to express “or later” in canonical R license fields.) > >> I guess this is about the possible license incompatibility between LGPLv3 >> and Apache? I tried to explain that in any case, there's nothing I can >> do about it anyway.. > > Actually, the declaration in this package means “either this or that” > license. > > See https://cran.r-project.org/doc/manuals/R-exts.html#The-DESCRIPTION-file > > “The mandatory ‘License’ field in the DESCRIPTION file should > specify the license of the package in a standardized > form. Alternatives are indicated via vertical bars.” > > Your patch is fine if you add a comment above the license field that > states that these one of these two licenses may be choosen.
Right. Would the following patch be alright then: modified gnu/packages/statistics.scm @@ -2787,6 +2787,26 @@ Fourier transform, fuzzy clustering, support vector machines, shortest path computation, bagged clustering, naive Bayes classifier, and more.") (license license:gpl2+))) +(define-public r-bigmemory-sri + (package + (name "r-bigmemory-sri") + (version "0.1.3") + (source + (origin + (method url-fetch) + (uri (cran-uri "bigmemory.sri" version)) + (sha256 + (base32 "0mg14ilwdkd64q2ri9jdwnk7mp55dqim7xfifrs65sdsv1934h2m")))) + (properties + `((upstream-name . "bigmemory.sri"))) + (build-system r-build-system) + (home-page "http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/bigmemory.sri") + (synopsis "Shared resource interface for the bigmemory package") + (description "This package provides a shared resource interface for the +bigmemory and synchronicity packages.") + ;; Users can choose either LGPLv3 or ASL2.0. + (license (list license:lgpl3 license:asl2.0)))) + (define-public r-nmf (package (name "r-nmf") Kind regards, Roel Janssen