[yt-dev] Proposed: Moving yt from GPLv3 to BSD-like license

Thu Jul 11 20:45:02 PDT 2013

Yea.

On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 11:05 PM, Sam Leitner <sam.leitner at gmail.com> wrote:

> "Yea" for the IPython license.
> SamL
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 8:13 PM, Anthony Scopatz <scopatz at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I, for one, say "Yea" to the re-licensing.
>>
>> Be Well
>> Anthony
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 6:26 PM, Brian O'Shea <bwoshea at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Matt,
>>>
>>> I'm not a yt contributor, but I *am* a yt user and strong supporter of
>>> the yt project in a variety of ways. For what it's worth, I find your
>>> arguments very compelling, and I totally agree with you - a more permissive
>>> license will enable broader use of the code, and the obvious upsides are
>>> much greater than any potential negatives (at least as far as I can tell).
>>> So, please take this as my (non-binding, somewhat irrelevant) +1 of the
>>> idea.  :-)
>>>
>>> --Brian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Matthew Turk <matthewturk at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> I apologize for the long email, but because this is a relatively
>>>> important subject I need to address a few items in detail.
>>>>
>>>> This is meant as a discussion point.  I would like to ensure
>>>> investment in a change like this from the yt community, both
>>>> developers and users, and I think before a decision can be made to
>>>> either change or remain the same we should ensure that community
>>>> members are able to voice concerns or suggestions.
>>>>
>>>> = What =
>>>>
>>>> I'm writing to propose a change in the licesning scheme for yt.
>>>> Currently, yt is licensed under the GPLv3 license.  This license
>>>> brings with it an idealogy that I support -- free (as in freedom) and
>>>> open source software, and attempts to ensure that the spread of
>>>> software spreads those freedoms as well.  This is done through terms
>>>> of licensing; while there are several subtleties to how this plays
>>>> out, and the goals of FLOSS and the GPL align very well with my own, I
>>>> don't believe that it is appropriate for yt to be licensed under the
>>>> GPL any more.
>>>>
>>>> = Why =
>>>>
>>>> In the scientific software community, for the most part codes and
>>>> platforms are released under a permissive, BSD-like license.  This is
>>>> not universally true.  Within the scientific python ecosystem
>>>> (including projects such as AstroPy), BSD-like licenses are especially
>>>> prevalent.  These licenses place no restrictions on redistribution,
>>>> passing on freedoms to end users, or making a piece of software
>>>> closed-source.  A side effect is that if a piece of software is BSD
>>>> licensed, it cannot rely on GPL'd software without itself being
>>>> subject to those terms.  Specifically, a BSD licensed package that
>>>> requires an import of a GPL'd package is likely itself then subject to
>>>> the GPL -- this is why it has been termed "viral" in the past.  As
>>>> examples, many BSD-licensed packages exist in the scientific software
>>>> community: VisIt, ParaView, MayaVi, NumPy, Matplotlib, IPython, Python
>>>> itself, mpi4py, h5py, SymPy, SciPy, most of the scikits,
>>>> scikits-learn, NetworkX and so on.  Collaboration with these projects
>>>> is currently one-way because of our license.
>>>>
>>>> When I initially decided on a license for yt (seven years ago) it
>>>> seemed appropriate to use the licensing terms as a mechanism to
>>>> encourage contributions upstream.  However, within the current
>>>> ecosystem, it is clear that because of the virality of the GPL and the
>>>> prevailing mindsets of developers, it is actually an impediment to
>>>> receiving contributions and receiving mindshare.  John Hunter
>>>> described it very clearly in this document:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://nipy.sourceforge.net/software/license/johns_bsd_pitch.html#johns-bsd-pitch
>>>>
>>>> While he focuses on commercial utilization, I believe that within the
>>>> scientific python ecosystem the picture can be broadened to include
>>>> any piece of software that is under a permissive license.  yt cannot
>>>> be used or relied upon as a primary component without that piece of
>>>> software then becoming subject to the terms of the GPL.  Additionally,
>>>> some private and public institutions are averse to providing code
>>>> under the GPL, specifically version 3 of the GPL.
>>>>
>>>> By transitioning to a permissive license, we may be able to receive
>>>> more contributions and collaborate more widely.  As a few examples,
>>>> this could include more direct collaborations with packages such as
>>>> Glue, IPython, VisIt, ParaView, and even utilization and exposing of
>>>> yt methods and operations in other, permissively-licensed packages.
>>>> For example, deep integration between permissively-licensed simulation
>>>> codes will benefit from this.  Furthermore, individuals who otherwise
>>>> could not contribute code under the GPL (due to employer restrictions)
>>>> will be able to contribute code under a permissive license.
>>>>
>>>> The GPL is designed to prevent turning FLOSS code proprietary.
>>>> Changing to a BSD license does not allow another entity to prevent us
>>>> from continuing to develop or make available any yt code.  It simply
>>>> means that others can utilize it however they see fit.
>>>>
>>>> I believe that we stand to gain considerably more than we stand to
>>>> lose from such a transition.
>>>>
>>>> More to the point, a few years ago on this mailing list we came up
>>>> with a mission statement for yt.  I think we can better serve that
>>>> mission statement by enabling broader collaborations within the
>>>> scientific software ecosystem.
>>>>
>>>> This is not motivated by any desire to create a proprietary
>>>> distribution of yt -- in fact, exactly the opposite.  Recently I have
>>>> begun to think about the future of yt if I, personally, end up having
>>>> to depart the community.  I believe that in the current ecosystem of
>>>> scientific software, yt will be more sustainable if it is under a
>>>> permissive license.
>>>>
>>>> = License=
>>>>
>>>> I specifically believe that the IPython license, which is itself the
>>>> modified BSD license, is the license we should move to.  I am willing
>>>> to entertain other options (such as the PSF license, which matplotlib
>>>> uses, or an MIT-like license).  While it is tempting to me to suggest
>>>> that we license under the LGPL, I don't think that this would provide
>>>> any benefits over moving directly to a fully permissive license.
>>>>
>>>> http://ipython.org/ipython-doc/dev/about/license_and_copyright.html
>>>>
>>>> While we are doing this, I would like to suggest we enumerate the
>>>> copyright model that IPython does, as that is exactly the copyright
>>>> model we exist under currently but it is not specifically identified
>>>> in the code base.
>>>>
>>>> yt will continue to have a GPL-mode, where we can link against GPL'd
>>>> libraries such as Rockstar, ExtJS and so on.  However, this mode will
>>>> be activated by a specific set of imports or items, and the core yt
>>>> functionality will by default not activate any of this mode.  This is
>>>> similar to how packages like VisIt and ParaView link against R, which
>>>> is itself GPL'd.
>>>>
>>>> = How =
>>>>
>>>> If we do decide to make this change, this is the process that it will
>>>> take:
>>>>
>>>>  1) I have created a spreadsheet of every contributor to yt.  This
>>>> spreadsheet will be public.
>>>>  2) I will individually write to each one, asking for their consent to
>>>> relicense their contributions under the new license.
>>>>  3) All responses will be directed to yt-svn (rather than yt-dev)
>>>> which is a publicly accessible and archived mailing list.  A link to
>>>> the archive post for each message will be placed in the spreadsheet.
>>>>  4) If we as a project decide that we are committed to moving to a
>>>> permissive license and an individual does not consent to change the
>>>> license of their code, we will need to either rewrite or remove it.
>>>> Alternately, this could serve as a veto for a transition.  We will
>>>> discuss this if it arises.
>>>>  5) Once complete, I will issue a pull request that changes the
>>>> license and makes explicit the copyright policy.
>>>>
>>>> All previous releases of yt will remain under the GPL, as will any
>>>> previous changesets of yt prior to the acceptance of item #5.
>>>>
>>>> = Votes / Discussion =
>>>>
>>>> At this time, I would like to request and solicit feedback or votes.
>>>>
>>>> If you have contributed a large amount of code to yt, please write
>>>> back to this email with a Yea or a Nay to this change and any comments
>>>> you have about it, or suggestions about a particular license other
>>>> than the IPython license.  In particular, if you are opposed to this
>>>> change, *please* make your voice heard so that we can have a
>>>> productive discussion about it.
>>>>
>>>> = Thank you =
>>>>
>>>> Thank you very much for taking the time to read this.  This email and
>>>> initiative is the result of a lot of soul-searching on my part.
>>>>
>>>> I have come to believe very strongly that as a project we can do more
>>>> to support goals of open science, open source, and build a stronger
>>>> community by rethinking how we fit into an ecosystem of scientific
>>>> software.
>>>>
>>>> -Matt
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> yt-dev mailing list
>>>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>>>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> yt-dev mailing list
>>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> yt-dev mailing list
>> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
>> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> yt-dev mailing list
> yt-dev at lists.spacepope.org
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.spacepope.org/pipermail/yt-dev-spacepope.org/attachments/20130711/701cf7b0/attachment.html>