On Oct 5, 2015, at 6:31 PM, Uwe Ligges <ligges at statistik.tu-dortmund.de> wrote:> > > On 05.10.2015 23:47, Andrew Robinson wrote: >> As a fourth option, I wonder if the first author could fork the package? >> >> Presumably, appropriately cited, a fork is permitted by the license under >> which it was released. Then the original package, by both authors, still >> exists (and a final version could point to the new one) and the new >> package, citing the previous version appropriately, is by a single author. > > No, copyright remains. You can fork given the license permits it, but there are still the same copyright holders ... >To clarify, legally, you can fork a standard GPL package and make any changes you want, including changing authors fields etc. If you don't own copyright for the entire work then you cannot change the license without consent from the other copyright holders, otherwise you have all the rights as anyone else granted by the license. However, CRAN policies go beyond that and say "Where code is copied (or derived) from the work of others (including from R itself), care must be taken that any copyright/license statements are preserved and authorship is not misrepresented. Preferably, an ?Authors at R? would be used with ?ctb? roles for the authors of such code. Alternatively, the ?Author? field should list these authors as contributors. Where copyrights are held by an entity other than the package authors, this should preferably be indicated via ?cph? roles in the ?Authors at R? field, or using a ?Copyright? field (if necessary referring to an inst/COPYRIGHTS file)." This means that CRAN will not accept a package where you did not list all copyright holders in one of the Author roles, although it is legal for you to do so outside of CRAN. Cheers, Simon> Best, > Uwe Ligges > > > >> >> The page of CRAN's policies doesn't seem to touch on forking, presumably >> because it's out of scope. >> >> Best wishes, >> >> Andrew >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 8:22 AM, Uwe Ligges <ligges at statistik.tu-dortmund.de> >> wrote: >> >>> Simply advice: >>> >>> The former co-author contributed, so he is still author and probably >>> copyright holder and has to be listed among the authors, otherwise it would >>> be a CRAN policy violation since even if he does not develop further on, he >>> developed parts of the so far existing package (if you talk about a CRAN >>> package). >>> >>> I am not a lawyer, hence I cannot speak for copyright/license stuff in >>> general, hence my comments only about CRAN policies. >>> >>> >>> Best, >>> Uwe Ligges >>> >>> >>> >>> On 05.10.2015 23:02, Adrian Du?a wrote: >>> >>>> Dear R developers, >>>> >>>> This is a rather peculiar question, but nevertheless I would still need an >>>> answer for. >>>> It is about an R package which I created (namely QCA), and from versions >>>> 1.0-0 to 1.1-4 I had a co-author. >>>> The co-author recently withdrawn from the package development, but still >>>> requires to be left in the authors list and be cited for the package in >>>> the >>>> CITATION file. >>>> >>>> Obviously, one could not require citations for further developments, but >>>> don't know how exactly to proceed (I would like to be fair and comply to >>>> rules). >>>> >>>> I have three options: >>>> >>>> 1. Since the co-author withdrawn from the package development, erase his >>>> name from the list of authors (but duly recognising his past contribution >>>> in the package description file) >>>> >>>> 2. Preserve his name in the list of authors (with the comment "up to >>>> version 1.1-4"), but erasing his name from the citation file >>>> >>>> 3. Keep his name both in the authors list and in the citation file >>>> indefinitely, even though he doesn't do any development work anymore (I >>>> have been threatened with a legal process for plagiarism if I did >>>> otherwise). >>>> >>>> My gut feeling is, since his name is related to the previous versions, >>>> anyone using those versions would cite him as well, but otherwise I don't >>>> feel comfortable citing my former co-author for the current work he hasn't >>>> contributed to. >>>> >>>> At this point, I would really use an advice, as on the other hand I >>>> wouldn't want to break any regulation I might not be aware of. >>>> >>>> Best wishes, >>>> Adrian >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> ______________________________________________ >>> R-devel at r-project.org mailing list >>> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel >>> >> >> >> > > ______________________________________________ > R-devel at r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 3:06 AM, Simon Urbanek <simon.urbanek at r-project.org> wrote:> > [...] > > To clarify, legally, you can fork a standard GPL package and make any > changes you want, including changing authors fields etc. If you don't own > copyright for the entire work then you cannot change the license without > consent from the other copyright holders, otherwise you have all the rights > as anyone else granted by the license. > > However, CRAN policies go beyond that and say > > "Where code is copied (or derived) from the work of others (including from > R itself), care must be taken that any copyright/license statements are > preserved and authorship is not misrepresented. > Preferably, an ?Authors at R? would be used with ?ctb? roles for the authors > of such code. Alternatively, the ?Author? field should list these authors > as contributors. > Where copyrights are held by an entity other than the package authors, > this should preferably be indicated via ?cph? roles in the ?Authors at R? > field, or using a ?Copyright? field (if necessary referring to an > inst/COPYRIGHTS file)." > > This means that CRAN will not accept a package where you did not list all > copyright holders in one of the Author roles, although it is legal for you > to do so outside of CRAN. >Please pardon my delay, I am writing from California and it's still morning here. I understand very well that I need to keep the previous co-author in the list of authors, and duly acknowledge his contribution. I would still be interested in the formal rules of compiling the citation file (example package Rcmdr), but for the moment it can be automatically generated via citation("QCA"). Both of these are perfectly compliant with the CRAN policies. As another attempt to solve the matter, I wonder if any rules would be broken if I used the .onAttach(...) function to print a message in the line of:> library(QCA)Users are encouraged to cite this package as: Dusa, Adrian (2015). QCA: Qualitative Comparative Analysis. R Package Version 1.2-0, URL: http://cran.r-project.org/package=QCA This is just an encouragement, not a requirement, and the official citation file meets the CRAN policies. Would that be acceptable? Best wishes, Adrian -- Adrian Dusa University of Bucharest Romanian Social Data Archive Soseaua Panduri nr.90 050663 Bucharest sector 5 Romania [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
Adrian, I am not on the CRAN or R-core teams, so the following is my own view, but...> library(QCA) > > Users are encouraged to cite this package as: > > Dusa, Adrian (2015). QCA: Qualitative Comparative Analysis. R Package > Version 1.2-0, > URL: http://cran.r-project.org/package=QCA > > This is just an encouragement, not a requirement, and the official citation > file meets the CRAN policies. Would that be acceptable? >At the very least, this is seems to be a flagrant violation of the *spirit* of the CRAN policy, which AFAIK is intended to enforce acknowledgement of the contributions of all copyright holders in the package. The fact that you are trying to bypass the policy by suggesting users use an unofficial citation which would not comply with the policy while maintaining an official one which complies, but which you don't want users to see is probably a suggestion that you shouldn't do that. Best, ~G> > Best wishes, > Adrian > > > -- > Adrian Dusa > University of Bucharest > Romanian Social Data Archive > Soseaua Panduri nr.90 > 050663 Bucharest sector 5 > Romania > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] > > ______________________________________________ > R-devel at r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel >-- Gabriel Becker, PhD Computational Biologist Bioinformatics and Computational Biology Genentech, Inc. [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
Dear Adrian, Have a look at the DESCRIPTION of the RODBC package. One of the authors was contributing from 1999 to 2002. I have the feeling that your situation is similar. Best regards, ir. Thierry Onkelinx Instituut voor natuur- en bosonderzoek / Research Institute for Nature and Forest team Biometrie & Kwaliteitszorg / team Biometrics & Quality Assurance Kliniekstraat 25 1070 Anderlecht Belgium To call in the statistician after the experiment is done may be no more than asking him to perform a post-mortem examination: he may be able to say what the experiment died of. ~ Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher The plural of anecdote is not data. ~ Roger Brinner The combination of some data and an aching desire for an answer does not ensure that a reasonable answer can be extracted from a given body of data. ~ John Tukey 2015-10-06 18:55 GMT+02:00 Adrian Du?a <dusa.adrian at unibuc.ro>:> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 3:06 AM, Simon Urbanek <simon.urbanek at r-project.org > > > wrote: > > > > > [...] > > > > To clarify, legally, you can fork a standard GPL package and make any > > changes you want, including changing authors fields etc. If you don't own > > copyright for the entire work then you cannot change the license without > > consent from the other copyright holders, otherwise you have all the > rights > > as anyone else granted by the license. > > > > However, CRAN policies go beyond that and say > > > > "Where code is copied (or derived) from the work of others (including > from > > R itself), care must be taken that any copyright/license statements are > > preserved and authorship is not misrepresented. > > Preferably, an ?Authors at R? would be used with ?ctb? roles for the > authors > > of such code. Alternatively, the ?Author? field should list these authors > > as contributors. > > Where copyrights are held by an entity other than the package authors, > > this should preferably be indicated via ?cph? roles in the ?Authors at R? > > field, or using a ?Copyright? field (if necessary referring to an > > inst/COPYRIGHTS file)." > > > > This means that CRAN will not accept a package where you did not list all > > copyright holders in one of the Author roles, although it is legal for > you > > to do so outside of CRAN. > > > > > Please pardon my delay, I am writing from California and it's still morning > here. > I understand very well that I need to keep the previous co-author in the > list of authors, and duly acknowledge his contribution. > I would still be interested in the formal rules of compiling the citation > file (example package Rcmdr), but for the moment it can be automatically > generated via citation("QCA"). > > Both of these are perfectly compliant with the CRAN policies. > > As another attempt to solve the matter, I wonder if any rules would be > broken if I used the .onAttach(...) function to print a message in the line > of: > > > library(QCA) > > Users are encouraged to cite this package as: > > Dusa, Adrian (2015). QCA: Qualitative Comparative Analysis. R Package > Version 1.2-0, > URL: http://cran.r-project.org/package=QCA > > This is just an encouragement, not a requirement, and the official citation > file meets the CRAN policies. Would that be acceptable? > > Best wishes, > Adrian > > > -- > Adrian Dusa > University of Bucharest > Romanian Social Data Archive > Soseaua Panduri nr.90 > 050663 Bucharest sector 5 > Romania > > [[alternative HTML version deleted]] > > ______________________________________________ > R-devel at r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel >[[alternative HTML version deleted]]