From djsamperi at earthlink.net  Wed Dec 23 06:27:29 2009
From: djsamperi at earthlink.net (Dominick Samperi)
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 2009 00:27:29 -0500
Subject: [Rd] Rcpp: Clarifying the meaning of GPL?
In-Reply-To: <8b356f880912222008o47ee54c9k267773cc570708d2@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4B310C77.9030806@earthlink.net>
	<8b356f880912222008o47ee54c9k267773cc570708d2@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4B31AA41.2010700@earthlink.net>

Stavros Macrakis wrote:
> That said, as a matter of courtesy and clarity, I'd think that a fork 
> should use a different name.
Yes, the point is that this is not a legal or technical matter, it is a 
matter of professional courtesy.

I take this as one vote for the name change.

On US copyright law, this should not be confused with "copyright" 
notices that appear in GPL
source code. Remember that these are really "copyleft" notices, and 
copyleft is designed to
protect the rights of copiers, not original contributors. My concern 
about the copyright notice
should be viewed in the same spirit as the name change (professional 
courtesy).

Since GPL is largely silent on these issues I have asked the R community 
to vote...

Thanks,
Dominick



[Rd] Rcpp: Clarifying the meaning of GPL?
Dominick Samperi