r-cran-afex package, violates the GPL?

[Jonathon Love]

hi,

i've just packaged and submitted the r-cran-afex package, and it has
been accepted

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=797819

but now i'm wondering if it doesn't violate the GPL2.

it is released under GPL3+, but it has dependencies which are GPL2

r-cran-afex and its dependencies are R packages, which run under the R
interpreter.
r-cran-afex calls functions provided by its dependencies.

does this constitute a violation of the GPL2?

with thanks

jonathon

-- 

JASP - A Fresh Way to Do Statistics
http://jasp-stats.org/

--

How happy is he born and taught,
That serveth not another's will;
Whose armour is his honest thought,
And simple truth his utmost skill

This man is freed from servile bands
Of hope to rise, or fear to fall:
Lord of himself, though not of lands,
And, having nothing, yet hath all.

  -- Sir Henry Wotton

Re: r-cran-afex package, violates the GPL?

[Jonathon Love]

hi ian,

On 30/09/2015 2:58 pm, Ian Jackson wrote:
> Jonathon Love writes ("r-cran-afex package, violates the GPL?"):
>> i've just packaged and submitted the r-cran-afex package, and it has
>> been accepted
>>
>> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=797819
>>
>> but now i'm wondering if it doesn't violate the GPL2.
>>
>> it is released under GPL3+, but it has dependencies which are GPL2
> 
> Which dependencies ?  Do you mean `GPL2+' or `GPL2-only' ?

r-cran-afex has the following GPL2-only dependencies:

 - r-cran-stringr
 - r-cran-coin
 - r-cran-lsmeans

with thanks

jonathon


-- 

JASP - A Fresh Way to Do Statistics
http://jasp-stats.org/

--

How happy is he born and taught,
That serveth not another's will;
Whose armour is his honest thought,
And simple truth his utmost skill

This man is freed from servile bands
Of hope to rise, or fear to fall:
Lord of himself, though not of lands,
And, having nothing, yet hath all.

  -- Sir Henry Wotton

Is an AGPL2 possible?

[Jonathon Love]

hi,

the AGPL3 is the GPL3 with an additional clause. is there some reason 
why an AGPL2 wouldn't be possible?


the AGPL3 is nice, but isn't compatible with GPLv2 only code, so an 
AGPL2 would be usable in places the AGPL3 can't be.


if an AGPL2-like license would be possible, how hard would it be to have 
it added to the debian approved free license list?


with thanks

jonathon