I don't know about the legal definitions of all, but a few years back the British Medical Journal had a filler article that looked at some surveys of what people thought different words meant (you can get at the filler by going to http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/333/7565/442 and downloading the pdf version of the article then scrolling to the end).
According to this, when people say always they could mean anywhere from 91-100% of the time and when they say never it could be 0-2% of the time. This doesn't prove anything, but I thought it was an interesting side note to the discussion. -- Gregory (Greg) L. Snow Ph.D. Statistical Data Center Intermountain Healthcare greg.s...@imail.org 801.408.8111 > -----Original Message----- > From: r-devel-boun...@r-project.org [mailto:r-devel-boun...@r- > project.org] On Behalf Of Dirk Eddelbuettel > Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 3:05 PM > To: Gabor Grothendieck > Cc: Friedrich Leisch; Matthew Dowle; charles blundell; r-de...@r- > project.org > Subject: Re: [Rd] License status of CRAN packages > > > On 23 April 2009 at 16:35, Gabor Grothendieck wrote: > | Of the 31 packages listed: > | [1] "BARD" "BayesDA" "CoCo" "ConvCalendar" > | [5] "FAiR" "PTAk" "RScaLAPACK" "Rcsdp" > | [9] "SDDA" "SGP" "alphahull" "ash" > | [13] "asypow" "caMassClass" "gpclib" "mapproj" > | [17] "matlab" "mclust" "mclust02" "mlbench" > | [21] "optmatch" "rankreg" "realized" "rngwell19937" > | [25] "rtiff" "rwt" "scagnostics" "sgeostat" > | [29] "spatialkernel" "tlnise" "xgobi" > | > | the license fields are AGPL or GPL for 3 and specified in a separate > | file "file LICENSE" so about 30 of 1700 < 2% are question marks. > > My point is that you currently need to manually parse 'file LICENSE'. > > And as I said, we did not claim that our set was exhaustive, current or > perfect. We just can't automate anything better given the current > framework. > And I think we all should be able to do better in scripted approaches. > I > still think you're proving my point. > > | To me that is not inconsistent with all or nearly all being free > software > > I doubt that "all or nearly all" would equated to "exactly all" by a > court. You only need one bad apple to spoil the lot. > > Dirk > > -- > Three out of two people have difficulties with fractions. > > ______________________________________________ > R-devel@r-project.org mailing list > https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel ______________________________________________ R-devel@r-project.org mailing list https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
