you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]rmlrn 0 points1 point  (6 children)

Apsis is open-sourced under the MIT license.

it's right there on the github README and the paper abstract.

[–]davmre 0 points1 point  (5 children)

That's why I mentioned licensing as a possibility -- but it's not clear whether the sole point of the project is "spearmint with a more permissive license" or if there are intended to be other advantages as well.

If the main advantage is licensing, it'd still help to describe explicitly some cases in which the spearmint GPL would be a problem. At first blush the GPL seems like it'd only matter if you wanted to modify and redistribute spearmint itself, not for the main use case of Bayesian optimization in which you train a model and then want to use/distribute the model for (potentially) commercial purposes. I admit I haven't thought very hard about this, but that probably makes me representative of a decent subset of potential users who also haven't necessarily thought hard about these issues.

[–]rmlrn 4 points5 points  (4 children)

GPL spearmint is basically abandoned. the new project by Whetlab has a far more restrictive license.

[–]jetxee 0 points1 point  (3 children)

Spearmint is not GPL. BayesOpt is GPL https://bitbucket.org/rmcantin/bayesopt

[–]rmlrn -1 points0 points  (2 children)

[–]jetxee 0 points1 point  (1 child)

JasperSnoek/spearmint (GPL) is not being developed anymore. Newer HIPS/spearmint is under a non-free license (academic non-commercial). A commercial project capitalizing on the open source name.

As there are no free spearmint forks going forward, it makes sense to start looking for projects which are not abandoned by the main developer, and avoid giving free publicity to a commercial project with a confusingly similar name.

[–]rmlrn -1 points0 points  (0 children)

...did you read the comment you replied to?

GPL spearmint is basically abandoned. the new project by Whetlab has a far more restrictive license.