license query

[Christopher Jones]

Hi,

Thanks for your feedback.

Just to expand a bit, the port I am working on just takes the Pypi who, and installs that into the macports python builds. See for instance

https://github.com/cjones051073/macports-ports/blob/add-pytorch/python/py-mkl/Portfile <https://github.com/cjones051073/macports-ports/blob/add-pytorch/python/py-mkl/Portfile>

As we are just taking the pre-pared releases from PyPi, and installing them, I was assuming that if that’s OK for PyPi its OK for us, as we ae only doing what pip users would anyway do.

PyTorch can take advantage of these libraries, but it can also build without them if needed. Its just not as efficient. So if people really where un easy the MKL dependency could be dropped.

Also note I was looking at the FAQ

https://software.intel.com/en-us/mkl/license-faq <https://software.intel.com/en-us/mkl/license-faq>

regarding the license.

cheers Chris

> On 7 Mar 2019, at 12:15 pm, Joshua Root <jmr at macports.org> wrote:
> 
> On 2019-3-7 21:43 , Christopher Jones wrote:
>> Hi All,
>> 
>> I am looking to setup some new ports, that will provide in macports
>> access to the Intel Math Kernel Library and headers (for use by another
>> port later on, PyTorch).
>> 
>> The license for this is the Intel Simplifed Software license
>> 
>> https://software.intel.com/en-us/license/intel-simplified-software-license
>> 
>> Which on a scan through the ports tree I don’t think we current use
>> anywhere, unless I missed it ?
>> 
>> Reading the above, (and based on PyPi’s distribution of it), I believe
>> it is fully distributable, so I am wondering what would be the correct
>> way to define the license, and allow the macports binary tarballs to be
>> distributable ? Currently I have arbitrarily set the license in the ports to
>> 
>> # https://software.intel.com/en-us/license/intel-simplified-software-license
>> license             ISSL
>> 
>> So I just made up a new license.
>> 
>> Any suggestions on the right thing to do here ? 
>> 
>> Also, the PyTorch port that I want to be able to use these will be BSD
>> licensed, and I would like to try and make sure this is also
>> distributable, so make sure the deps on the MKL ports does not prevent this.
> 
> This license is nonfree because it doesn't allow distribution of
> modified versions, and because "No reverse engineering, decompilation,
> or disassembly of this Software is permitted." We can still have it in
> MacPorts, but be very careful not to patch it in any way. The license
> option should be set to "Restrictive/Distributable".
> 
> The BSD license itself has no problem with being combined with more
> restrictive licenses (provided they don't prohibit doing the few things
> that the BSD license requires), but the "without modification"
> stipulation in the Intel license is potentially problematic. The FSF
> maintains that if program A is linked to program B, then A is a
> derivative work of B, and a derivative work could be viewed as a
> modified version.
> 
> I have no idea whether Intel shares the FSF's view on that point, or if
> they would care to take action based on it. The effects of Intel's
> license on software that uses their library would be something you'd
> have to ask a lawyer (possibly Intel's) about.
> 
> - Josh

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.macports.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20190307/c7598ece/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 1930 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.macports.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20190307/c7598ece/attachment.bin>