[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Confusion about RAxML versions and copyright

Hi Alexandros,

I'm currently browsing my mailbox for old mails to update my todo list.
I stumbled uppon your old mail to the Debian-Med list (full quote and
short summary because this is an English speaking list).

You mentioned the latest version of RAxML-VI-HPC (v2.2.3) is available
at

   http://icwww.epfl.ch/~stamatak/index-Dateien/Page443.htm

while giving the hint that there might be a drastically enhanced
version available at the end of this year.  Even more importantly
you agreed to add a license statement to the software.  This is the
issue I why I ask once more to be sure when adding the record to
our TODO-list: Is it positively clear that you will use GPL (in
this case I would mention this).  Moreover I found links to
AxParafit and AxPcoords on your homepage where the description says:

  AxParafit and AxPcoords are highly optimized versions of Pierre
  Legendre's Parafit and DistPCoA programs for statistical analysis
  of host-parasite coevolution. AxParafit has also been parallelized
  with MPI (Message Passing Interface) for compute clusters. We have
  used parallel AxParafit to carry out the largest co-evolutionary
  analysis to date for the paper describing the software.

This would probably be interesting as well for Debian-Med but there
is also no license statement available.

Could you please comment on this?

Kind regards and thanks for linking Debian-Med on you page

      Andreas.


On Sat, 8 Sep 2007, Alexandros Stamatakis wrote:


Hallo Andreas,

Die aktuellste Version von  RAxML ist RAxML-VI-HPC (v2.2.3)
und liegt hier: http://icwww.epfl.ch/~stamatak/index-Dateien/Page443.htm

Die in ARB eingebaute Version ist veraltet.
Allerdings sollte noch dieses Jahr eine neue, stark verbesserte Version rauskommen. Soll ich Dich oder debian-med@lists.debian.org auf die RAxML Mailing-liste setzen? 


I now try to sort out some points for clarification.  This clarification
is done mainly on behalf of the Debian-Med project

    http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med

This project tries to provide all available Free Software that is useful
for medical care (which includes microbiology stuff - in fact this is currently 
the strongest part of the project).  The Debian GNU/Linux distribution is
allowed to distribute all software that has a license that complies to
the Debian Free Software Guidelines (DFSG) which are available at

    http://www.debian.org/social_contract#guidelines


klingt sehr gut....
Implizitely all software without a license statement is considered non-free. So all downloadable code from your sites have to be considered non-free from our point of vie and even the license statement that is inside the Arb packaged 
version which says

   LEGAL DISCLAIMER

   THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY ALEXANDROS STAMATAKIS AND THE INSTITUTE OF
   COMPUTER SCIENCE, FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGH HELLAS
   AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED
   WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT  NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES
   OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE
   DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHOR OR CONTRIBUTORS BE
   LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY,
   OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO,
   PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA,
   OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON
   ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY,
   OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY
   OUT OF  THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE
   POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. NO COMMERCIAL USE OR COMMERCIAL
   REDISTRIBUTION OF THIS SOFTWARE IS AUTHORIZED. ANY PUBLICATION
   BASED ON THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE MUST EXPLICITLY ACKNOWLEDGE ITS
   USE AND SHOULD CITE THE APPROPRIATE PAPER(S) LISTED IN THE README
   FILE.

is non-free because it says

   NO COMMERCIAL USE OR COMMERCIAL REDISTRIBUTION OF THIS SOFTWARE
   IS AUTHORIZED.

which is considered as discrimination of distribution.  The idea behind
is that no distributor would be allowed to ship Debian DVDs if these would
contain software with this type of license.

So my questions are:

  1. Could you please enlighten my view on all these different versions?
  2. Could you please add a license statement to your code - prefered a
     license that complies to the DFSG.  Of course the choice of a license
     is your decision but code with no license statement at all sucks and
     might backfire at you at one day.
Okay, das war wohl eine Nachlaessigkeit meinerseits, ich setze das unter die GPL, 
das sollte das Problem loesen.


In case you would decide for a free license that would enable us to package
RAxML for Debian we would be happy to include your work into our distribution 
which would IMHO be a benefit for RAxML because people all over the world
working in the field of biology and using Debian would immediately learn about 
this software.


Bis bald,

Alexi


--
Dr. Alexandros Stamatakis

Postdoctoral Researcher
High Performance Computing Bioinformatics

Swiss Federal Institute of Technology
School of Computer & Communication Sciences
Laboratory for Computational Biology and Bioinformatics (LCBB)
STATION 14
CH-1015 Lausanne, Switzerland

Tel:   +41 21 69 31392 (Office)
     +41 22 54 80003 (SkypeIn)
     +41 796115849   (Mobile)
Skype: stamatak
Email: Alexandros.Stamatakis@epfl.ch
WWW:   icwww.epfl.ch/~stamatak


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-med-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org





--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: