octave-maintainers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: proposal for new m-file function


From: Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso
Subject: Re: proposal for new m-file function
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 06:26:53 -0400

On 25 March 2012 18:59, Ben Abbott <address@hidden> wrote:
> I'm not sure what the protocol is for including an m-file with at
> BSD license in Octave's core.
>
> What I've done it rename Jonas Lundgren's ppfit.m to __ppfit__.m and
> place it in scripts/polynomial/private, and then added a ppfit.m
> with the the tex-info documentation, some demos, and tests.
>
> I think this meets the terms of the "Simplified BSD License" or
> "FreeBSD License" he choose to use.
>
> I've also modified Lundgren's m-file to accept a new weighting
> input.

This is all fine. If you make changes to it, you may choose to license
your own changes under the GPLv3, adding a GPLv3 license header with
your copyright on top of Lundgreen's own BSD header, but typically
people who use the BSD dislike this. It's polite, but not necessary,
to license your own changes under the same BSD terms and just add your
own name to the copyright field like we do with our own files. The
ppfit wrapper should be GPLv3 since that's "natively" part of Octave.

I would move Lundgreen's header to the top, make the superficial
changes to adapt the script to our house style, and add your own name
to the copyright.

I do wonder if Lundgreen chose the BSD license due to the Mathworks'
bullying. The copyright says 2009, which is when TMW started to force
that license on everyone, so that they could impose restrictions like
these:

    http://www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/termsofuse.html#content

HTH,
- Jordi G. H.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]