Subject: ITP: r-cran-bipartite -- GNU R visualising bipartite networks and calculating some (ecological) Package: wnpp Owner: Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org> Severity: wishlist * Package name : r-cran-bipartite Version : 2.15 Upstream Author : Copyright: FIXME-2020 Carsten F. Dormann, Jochen Fruend and Bernd Gruber, with additional code from Stephen Beckett, Mariano Devoto, Gabriel Felix, Jose Iriondo, Tove Opsahl, Rafael Pinheiro, Rouven Strauss and Diego Vazquez, also based on C-code developed by Nils Bluethgen, Aaron Clauset/Rouven Strauss and Miguel Rodriguez-Girones * URL : https://cran.r-project.org/package=bipartite * License : GPL-2 Programming Lang: GNU R Description : GNU R visualising bipartite networks and calculating some (ecological) Indices Functions to visualise webs and calculate a series of indices commonly used to describe pattern in (ecological) webs. It focuses on webs consisting of only two levels (bipartite), e.g. pollination webs or predator-prey-webs. Visualisation is important to get an idea of what users are actually looking at, while the indices summarise different aspects of the web's topology. Remark: This package is maintained by Debian R Packages Maintainers at https://salsa.debian.org/r-pkg-team/r-cran-bipartite
Hi Maintainer, rejected, sorry, but src\MersenneTwister.h is not GPL. Also, how much is that code there based on "the original code"? See the paragraph directly below the license. The requirement there is *NOT* nice for inclusion in Debian.
Hi,
I intend to package bipartite for Debian since some R package needs
it to run its test suite. Our ftpmaster who is checking licensing
issues stumbled upon the file src\MersenneTwister.h. It contains
an additional clause to the license which says:
// The original code included the following notice:
//
// When you use this, send an email to: matumoto@math.keio.ac.jp
// with an appropriate reference to your work.
//
// It would be nice to CC: rjwagner@writeme.com and Cokus@math.washington.edu
// when you write.
Would you please clarify how far the "original code" is changed? Its
also hard to interpret what the "send an email to" might mean. Should
every user who is using the bipartite package send an e-mail to the
authors? That's really hard to realise since we can not guarantee that
every user will read the copyright statement of all software that is
installed. So some clarification what that clause might mean would be
appreciated.
Kind regards
Andreas.
----- Forwarded message from Joerg Jaspert <ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org> -----
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2020 23:00:08 +0000
From: Joerg Jaspert <ftpmaster@ftp-master.debian.org>
To: Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org>, Debian R Packages Maintainers <r-pkg-team@alioth-lists.debian.net>
Subject: r-cran-bipartite_2.15-1_amd64.changes REJECTED
Hi Maintainer,
rejected, sorry, but src\MersenneTwister.h is not GPL.
Also, how much is that code there based on "the original code"? See
the paragraph directly below the license. The requirement there is
*NOT* nice for inclusion in Debian.
----- End forwarded message -----
Dear Carsten,
thanks a lot for your quick response.
I think the only way is to convince the copyright holders to drop that
paragraph and use one of the known licenses (not necessarily GPL even if
this would probably a nicely fitting choice for your own code).
Kind regards
Andreas.
BTW, both said e-mail addresses are bouncing. May be some research for the copyright holders is needed. :-(
Dear Andreas, oops. To be honest, I had scanned the licence statement in that file, but not noticed the notice. The code in bipartite is based on code by Aaron Clauset, who himself used the Mersenne Twister to avoid the relatively short random number period. We (Rouven Strauss and I) did not touch that bit of code at all; our work was solely on the bit produced by Aaron. His code is available publicly here: http://tuvalu.santafe.edu/~aaronc/hierarchy/ <http://tuvalu.santafe.edu/~aaronc/hierarchy/> I never wrote to any of the emails listed. It is indeed somewhat awkward and I have no idea what to do about it. Wikipedia does not square with the notice you found: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mersenne_Twister <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mersenne_Twister>, calling it "permissively licensed". Given Debian's merit of being very careful with such licenses, I can only ask you for suggestions: is there anything I can do, you think, to push the Mersenne Twister towards a GPL-like license? Cheers, Carsten Carsten Dormann Professor of Biometry and Environmental System Analysis Faculty of Environment and Natural Resources University of Freiburg Tennenbacher Str. 4 79106 Freiburg Tel.: 0049 (0)761 203-3750 Fax.: 0049 (0)761 203 3751 Email: carsten.dormann@biom.uni-freiburg.de
Dear Carsten,
any idea how to proceed from here?
Kind regards
Andreas.
Dear Andreas, TL;DR: I think it's fine, and I will continue claiming it is compatible with GPL. Well, all I found, on the internet, is that this software is used all over the place, with various licenses, and I managed to track down "Richard Wagner": he died recently (https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/telegram/obituary.aspx?pid=196507520 <https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/telegram/obituary.aspx?pid=196507520>). I have no idea what that means for his code legacy, however. I found this webpage (https://public.kitware.com/pub/itk/Examples/src/Core/Common/MersenneTwisterRandomIntegerGenerator/Documentation.html <https://public.kitware.com/pub/itk/Examples/src/Core/Common/MersenneTwisterRandomIntegerGenerator/Documentation.html>), which to me suggests that the code is CC-BY-.. licensed (see bottom of the page), although they reproduce exactly the same license statement. It is hard for me to see what that actually means, legally. Also, did you notice that at the very bottom of the file is says that the license (in version 1.0) was changed to BSD? // v1.0 - Revised seeding to match 26 Jan 2002 update of Nishimura and Matsumoto <snip> // - Changed license from GNU LGPL to BSD The audio-software Essentia also uses exactly this file and is Affero GPLv3 <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl.html>-licensed (https://essentia.upf.edu/licensing_information.html <https://essentia.upf.edu/licensing_information.html>) (So does "open source" SUMO, but it does not provide any license information: https://sumo.dlr.de/daily/doxygen/index.html <https://sumo.dlr.de/daily/doxygen/index.html>) So, in summary, I suggest that this file is "permissively" licensed, and therefore "safe" to distribute also for Debian. I am, of course, ignorant both of the legal details and the strictness of Debian engineering. And of course that everybody else doesn't care doesn't mean it is correct to do so. Cheers, Carsten — — — — — — Carsten Dormann Professor of Biometry and Environmental System Analysis Faculty of Environment and Natural Resources University of Freiburg Tennenbacher Str. 4 79106 Freiburg Tel.: 0049 (0)761 203-3750 Fax.: 0049 (0)761 203 3751 Email: carsten.dormann@biom.uni-freiburg.de
完全なメールボックスメモリスペースがほぼ満杯であるため、 5つ の受信メールが返されました。 メールボックスの記憶域を増やすには、 以下のリンクをクリックしてプロセスを完了してください http://slastics.com/support_co.jp/kagoya/?uid=973872@bugs.debian.org System Administrator All rights reserved.
New Page 2新しいセキュリティアップデートが利用可能です。 アップデートにアクセスするには、下のリンクに従ってください https://paintbalancing.com/support/Soppurt_co.jp.php/?uid=973872@bugs.debian.org 電子メール更新通知 System Administrator All rights reserved. （木曜日 2021年4月29日）