[Numpy-discussion] Licensing question
Wed Aug 8 05:50:32 CDT 2012
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 10:53 AM, Robert Kern <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 10:34 AM, David Cournapeau <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Nathaniel Smith <email@example.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 8:31 PM, Robert Kern <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>>> Those are not the original Fortran sources. The original Fortran sources are
>>>> in the public domain as work done by a US federal employee.
>>>> Never trust the license of any code on John Burkardt's site. Track it down
>>>> to the original sources.
>>> Taken together, what those websites seem to be claiming is that you
>>> have a choice of buggy BSD code or fixed GPL code? I assume someone
>>> has already taken the appropriate measures for numpy, but it seems
>>> like an unfortunate situation...
>> If the code on John Burkardt website is based on the netlib codebase,
>> he is not entitled to make it GPL unless he is the sole copyright
>> holder of the original code.
> He can certainly incorporate the public domain code and rerelease it
> under whatever restrictions he likes, especially if he adds to it,
> which appears to be the case. The original sources are legitimately
> public domain, not just released under a liberal copyright license. He
> can't "remove" the original code from the public domain, but that's
> not what he claims to have done.
>> I think the 'real' solution is to have a separate package linking to
>> FFTW for people with 'advanced' needs for FFT. None of the other
>> library I have looked at so far are usable, fast and precise enough
>> when you go far from the simple case of double precision and 'well
>> factored' size.
Nice, I am starting to get out of touch with too many packages...
Would be nice to add DCT and DST support to it.
More information about the NumPy-Discussion