Re: [R] licensing of R packages

From: Carlos Ungil <carlos.ungil_at_GMAIL.COM>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 08:02:10 -0800 (PST)

Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
> I'm not going into the original question except to point out that R is
> licensed under GPL-2 and the quote was from the GPL-3 FAQ. As FSF
> themselves insist, the two licences are incompatible.

Let me quote the corresponding section in the GPL2 FAQ, then:
> Another similar and very common case is to provide libraries with the
> interpreter which are themselves interpreted. For instance, Perl comes
> with many Perl modules, and a Java implementation comes with many Java
> classes. These libraries and the programs that call them are always
> dynamically linked together.
> A consequence is that if you choose to use GPL'd Perl modules or Java
> classes in your program, you must release the program in a
> GPL-compatible way, regardless of the license used in the Perl or Java
> interpreter that the combined Perl or Java program will run on.

Core R packages included in the R distribution are in fact "GPL (>= 2)" [*], but choosing GPLv2 or GPLv3 seems to make no difference in regard to the issue being discussed (again, according to the interpretation given by the FSF). Regards,


[*] this is not the case for all the recommended packages in the distribution

View this message in context:
Sent from the R help mailing list archive at

______________________________________________ mailing list
PLEASE do read the posting guide
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
Received on Fri 14 Nov 2008 - 16:04:36 GMT

Archive maintained by Robert King, hosted by the discipline of statistics at the University of Newcastle, Australia.
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0, at Fri 14 Nov 2008 - 16:30:25 GMT.

Mailing list information is available at Please read the posting guide before posting to the list.

list of date sections of archive