[Numpy-discussion] Default builds of OpenBLAS development branch are now fork safe

[Matthew Brett]

Hi,

On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Robert Kern <robert.kern at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 2:54 PM, Sturla Molden <sturla.molden at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Matthew Brett <matthew.brett at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I see it should be possible to build a full blas and partial lapack
>>> library with eigen [1] [2].
>>
>> Eigen has a licensing issue as well, unfortunately, MPL2.
>>
>> E.g. it requires recipients to be informed of the MPL requirements (cf.
>> impossible with pip install numpy).
>
> That's not the relevant condition. That's easily taken care of by
> including the MPL2 license text in the binary alongside numpy's BSD
> license text. This is no different than numpy's BSD license itself,
> which requires that the license text be included. It's not like people
> can't distribute any MPL2 project on PyPI just because pip doesn't
> print out the license before installing.
>
> The extra-BSD conditions of the MPL2 are sections 3.1 and 3.2.

Thanks for thinking this through.

If I read you right, your opinion is that there would be no problem
including Eigen binaries with Numpy.

License here: http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/

Section 3.1 - if we distribute Eigen source, it has to be under the
MPL; so that doesn't apply to binaries.

Section 3.2 a) says that if we distribute binaries, we have to point
to the original source (e.g. link on pypi page)
Section 3.2 b) says we can distribute the executable code under any
license as long as it doesn't restrict the user's access to Eigen
source.  I think that means there is no problem distributing the
binaries under the BSD license.  Nathaniel's link is the relevant one
: http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/2.0/FAQ.html#distribute-my-binaries

So - is Eigen our best option for optimized blas / lapack binaries on
64 bit Windows?

Cheers,

Matthew