On Sat, 2017-06-24 at 22:58 +0200, Carl Kleffner wrote: > Does this still apply: https://scipy.github.io/old-wiki/pages/License > _Compatibility.html >
Of course, but it talks about putting it into the code base of scipy not about being able to use the package in any way in a dependency (i.e. `import package`). - Sebastian > Carl > > 2017-06-24 22:07 GMT+02:00 Sebastian Berg <sebast...@sipsolutions.net > >: > > On Sat, 2017-06-24 at 15:47 -0400, josef.p...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 24, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> > > > wrote: > > > > On Jun 24, 2017 7:29 AM, "Sylvain Corlay" <sylvain.corlay@gmail > > .com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Also, one quick question: is the LGPL license a deliberate > > choice > > > > or is it not important to you? Most projects in the Python > > > > scientific stack are BSD licensed. So the LGPL choice makes it > > > > unlikely that a higher-level project adopts it as a dependency. > > If > > > > you are the only copyright holder, you would still have the > > > > possibility to license it under a more permissive license such > > as > > > > BSD or MIT... > > > > > > > > Why would LGPL be a problem in a dependency? That doesn't stop > > you > > > > making your code BSD, and it's less restrictive license-wise > > than > > > > depending on MKL or the windows C runtime... > > > > > > > > > > Is scipy still including any LGPL code, I thought not. > > > There might still be some optional dependencies that not many > > users > > > are using by default. ? > > > Julia packages are mostly MIT, AFAIK. (except for the GPL parts > > > because of cholmod, which we (?) avoid) > > > > > > > > > Well, I don't think scipy has many dependencies (but I would not be > > surprised if those are LGPL). Not a specialist, but as a dependency > > it > > should be fine (that is the point of the L in LGPL after all as far > > as > > I understand, it is much less viral). > > If you package it with your own stuff, you have to make sure to > > point > > out that parts are LGPL of course (just like there is a reason you > > get > > the GPL printed out with some devices) and if you modify it provide > > these modifications, etc. > > > > Of course you cannot include it into the scipy codebase itself, but > > there is probably no aim of doing so here, so without a specific > > reason > > I would think that LGPL is a great license. > > > > - Sebastian > > > > > > > Josef > > > > > > > -n > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > > > > NumPy-Discussion@python.org > > > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > > > NumPy-Discussion@python.org > > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > > > > _______________________________________________ > > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > > NumPy-Discussion@python.org > > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > > > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
