On 11/29/2013 5:41 PM, Nathaniel Smith wrote: > you seem to be flailing around, hoping that maybe > there will be some loophole that means the law will work out to be the > way you want?
Absolutely not. For one thing, I do not "want" one outcome or another. I just want the project to flourish. Also, I moved this into a separate thread with the idea that it should not be seen as an attempt to influence the license outcome, but rather to learn what is or is not *required*. (As opposed to what should or should not be chosen by the project.) > In my fairly well informed layman's opinion, rpy2 is unambiguously a > derivative work of R, and thus subject to the GPL's restrictions Since you suggested using the AFC criteria as the test, if you are willing, I would appreciate knowing what is being expressed in RPy that should be considered to be copied from R? On the one hand, I'm getting the feeling that you might say its the API, but of course the EFF has forcefully argued that APIs should not be copyrightable. And I would be truly surprised to find you siding with Oracle against Google on something like this. On the other hand, I suspect that you will say I have completely missed the point, and that this analogy is entirely irrelevant. Again, this is largely academic, since it seems that there is sentiment to keep RPy GPL'd. If you are willing to help me understand, however, I'll appreciate it. Alan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349351&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ rpy-list mailing list rpy-list@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rpy-list
