Re: SVN checkin
On 12/01/2008, at 3.27, Nelson A. de Oliveira wrote:
On Jan 12, 2008 12:13 AM, Nelson A. de Oliveira <naoliv@gmail.com>
wrote:
And I was thinking if it's not better to use /tmp/mustang (instead
only mustang) in debian/runtest and debian/patches/test_zf-
cchh.dpatch
^^^^^^^
Instead only /tmp, sorry
Yeah, that's a good idea. I've made the change and commited it...
I see that you have added "dfsg" to the package name, which I guess
in principle is correct. I'd like to hear, however, what the
concensus in this forum is on the inclusion of scientific data.
I had a hard time convincing some of the MOTUs that PDB files are
scientific data and thus in the public domain. I have to admit, that
I can not document that claim from anywhere. I asked on the pdb-l ML,
and the replies I got from the most qualified people, in charge of
the databank, was in fact that no one has ever given that question a
serious thought. The PDB _identifiers_ themselves are apparently
protected.
I got around the MOTU's objections by writing the "runtest" script.
I it my firm belief, however, that scientific data historically is in
the public domain, and that is also what I feel is the way it should be.
So, perhaps, instead of renaming the package with the "dfsg" label,
it would be better to use upstream's tarball unaltered and also
distribute the full set of samples. Please note that the pdb files in
upstreams tarball are not the pristine ones from the databank, but
have been edited to include only one protein chain.
I guess there must be other bioinformatics packages that include
scientific data (sequences, PDB files...)?
Cheers,
Morten
Reply to: