@Bob_Carpenter , are you ok with including a library that’s Apache 2.0 inside Math?

[image] Bob_Carpenter: No. It’s a huge mailing list for everyone with so much traffic I can’t keep up. I try to keep up with the developers thread, but it’s not pushed to me like email, so I could easily miss something that was only up for a week. +1. For major decisions like this one that ne…

[image] syclik: Where did this date come from? @seantalts suggested to wait for a week, see from above [image] seantalts: If anyone objects to the inclusion of Apache 2.0 licensed dependencies, I’d ask that you speak now. If anyone objects in the next week, we’ll hold a Stan electorate-w…

nlmixr( GitHub - nlmixrdevelopment/nlmixr: nlmixr: an R package for population PKPD modeling ) is under GPLv2 and uses Stan to calculate ODE Jacobian. I wonder if this change would push them away. [image] seantalts: by including Apache 2.0 licensed dependencies we lose the ability to distribute S…

It shouldn’t because they do not use MCMC and they could link against the RcppParallel package like RStan will do, but I should check with them that they only #include the right stuff.

They do have nlmixrdevelopment/nlmixr/blob/73df43176c31d4eaa948ff56cb998a5642780dac/src/ode_cmt1.cpp#L7-L9 #include <stan/math/rev/core.hpp> #include <stan/math/prim/mat/fun/Eigen.hpp> #include <stan/math.hpp> isn’t this where TBB would be going to?

[image] yizhang: I wonder if this change would push them away. As I understood things, then even nlmixr is fine. The reason is that the users will put together the final binary thing - which is fine since still no unitary binary would be distributed. This is how I understand it. (and I can a…

[image] wds15: I only made the date meant by that explicit. Thank you! I read that in @seantalts ’s post, but didn’t put 2 and 2 together. ( @seantalts , could you be more specific and more clearly note action required in your posts? That was buried far down in that comment and having a clear da…

Just so we’re on the same page, for the Math library, we’re ok including Apache 2 licensed dependencies, but we’re being careful so that we’re not leaving pitfalls for things that depend on Math. we can continue to license Math as BSD even if it has a Apache 2 dependency we can distribute an Apach…

[image] syclik: ( @seantalts , could you be more specific and more clearly note action required in your posts? That was buried far down in that comment and having a clear date is better than just “the next week.”) I actually said it twice and ended with a call to action, [image] seantalts: …

Yes, we’re only incompatible with being distributed with GPLv2 licenses as a single work. I think that is possibly a unique property of GPLv2.

Licenses of dependencies

Developers

bgoodri September 10, 2019, 2:03pm 55

I would think a GitHub issue or if not on GitHub an email.

Apache 2 library inclusion into Stan Math--general policy case. Trip wire consensus decision

Topic		Replies	Views
Apache 2 library inclusion into Stan Math--general policy case. Trip wire consensus decision Developers	8	728	September 16, 2019
TBB and 2.21 Developers	34	2670	October 17, 2019
Rstan & StanHeaders merger? A heads-up! RStan	27	2616	December 13, 2021
PyStan license PyStan	34	5386	September 7, 2018
Stan Math Release notes draft Developers math	27	1727	October 19, 2019

Licenses of dependencies

Related topics