license query

[Chris Jones]

Hi,

https://github.com/macports/macports-ports/pull/3825

I would be grateful if anyone interested took a look and commented. If I 
don't get any negative feedback I'll likely just merge by the w/e.

cheers Chris

On 07/03/2019 12:29 pm, Christopher Jones wrote:
> 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
> 
> 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
> 
> regarding the license.
> 
> cheers Chris
> 
>> On 7 Mar 2019, at 12:15 pm, Joshua Root <jmr at macports.org 
>> <mailto: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
>