Re: Test web-site of new octave-forge web-site including all packages

[Joe Koski]

on 10/10/06 11:39 AM, John W. Eaton at address@hidden wrote:

> What should we do about the "nonfree" packages?  The parts that are
> actually linked with Octave and have a non-free license can't be
> included in binary packages of Octave, and I belive that distributing
> them as source files and asking the user to do the link could be
> considered contributory infringement of the GPL.  We have had to
> remove similar code from Octave in the past due to license
> restrictions, so I would ask that the nonfree code that must be linked
> with Octave be removed from Octave Forge.
> 
> jwe

John,

As one of the few who actually uses gcvspl with it's octave interface, I
would hate to see it go, but I understand the dilemma. For what it is worth,
gcvspl.f is available for download on from www.netlib.org. How about leaving
the octave interface available (in the online help files?), but directing
those that want to use it to NetLib? Awkward, but better than throwing out
the hard work that went into developing the interface. What are the license
requirements for use of NetLib software anyway? Could it be that gcvspl
licensing has changed since it entered octave-forge? I think many octave and
octave-forge Fortran routines are included in NetLib.

Joe