11–20 of 30 posts
IANAL and I am scared by licenses I don't recognize. I pretty much bail as soon as I see the words "all rights reserved" regardless of what comes after it. That said, this license is extremely short and for a tool that is clearly intended to be distributed. Is this essentially a CC attribution license? If so, why not just use that? https://github.com/Selz/plyr/blob/master/license.md
IANAL and I am scared by licenses I don't recognize. I pretty much bail as soon as I see the words "all rights reserved" regardless of what comes after it. That said, this license is extremely short and for a tool that is clearly intended to be distributed. Is this essentially a CC attribution license? If so, why not just use that? https://github.com/Selz/plyr/blob/master/license.md
It's just a standard BSD 3-clause license, see: http://opensource.org/licenses/BSD-3-Clause
IANAL and I am scared by licenses I don't recognize. I pretty much bail as soon as I see the words "all rights reserved" regardless of what comes after it. That said, this license is extremely short and for a tool that is clearly intended to be distributed. Is this essentially a CC attribution license? If so, why not just use that? https://github.com/Selz/plyr/blob/master/license.md
On the upside, likely nobody cares. I doubt anybody has ever been sued over violating the BSD license.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yup, my first thought too. Though presumably different roots - player and pliers. There's also another stringr (crowdsourced video content platform) and caret (text editing for Chrome).
Now dplyr has pretty much replaced it with better syntax and perf. Take a look at it. https://github.com/hadley/dplyr
Why is it that popular libraries in R are replaced with other names when enhanced? I.e., plyr->dplyr, reshape->reshape2, etc.? Is it a namespacing thing? I guess if there's not a universally accepted way of versioning library imports that would explain it as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Now dplyr has pretty much replaced it with better syntax and perf. Take a look at it. https://github.com/hadley/dplyr
One thing I've been curious about with R: Why is it that popular libraries in R are replaced with other names when enhanced? I.e., plyr->dplyr, reshape->reshape2, etc.? Is it a namespacing thing? I guess if there's not a universally accepted way of versioning library imports that would explain it as well.
reshape does more than reshape2 which does more than tidyr
They actually get more refined and are different creatures with similar features and not different versions.
IANAL and I am scared by licenses I don't recognize. I pretty much bail as soon as I see the words "all rights reserved" regardless of what comes after it. That said, this license is extremely short and for a tool that is clearly intended to be distributed. Is this essentially a CC attribution license? If so, why not just use that? https://github.com/Selz/plyr/blob/master/license.md
I hadn't thought about it much until now though, perhaps that assumption is wrong in some jurisdictions.
Accessibility-wise this isn't very good. Heck, even from a usability standpoint: no tooltips if I don't understand a button? Why? Those circular arrows might mean repeat (do they?), but all I know is clicking them restarts the music. If I hover, I'm not told what it should be doing. There aren't even alt= attributes or titles somewhere for screen readers... except for a useless aria-label ("undefined, Video demo").
AS someone that programs in R plyr is a major library for manipulating languages. It is one of the most popular libraries in use for R. https://github.com/hadley/plyr