Re: BioSquid - should it be removed from the archive?
On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Charles Plessy wrote:
I just checked the HMMER3 sources, and they do not contain (bio)squid, so the
hmmer-squid would not have a long life.
Squid is two different things:
- a C library, which we do not package.
- some utilities built (statically?) with this C library, which we ship in the
biosquid package. Most utilities seem to have a counterpart in EMBOSS.
So do you think an "emboss-squid" package taking over the role of my
imaginary hmmer-squid package would do basically what our users want?
Maybe the simplest is to keep the biosquid package as long as it is not
problematic. But we need a way to tell our users that we do not intend to
commit ourself to make efforts for this package in the long term, in particular
for security updates and transitions to newer compilers. As Andreas pointed
out, it is not necessaryl a "bug".
Well, I think the way I posted in my first mail in this thread could
be a reasonable way to tell our users.
We will face similar situations in the future. Maybe we need a dedicated page
on our website?
If you have a suggestion how the users who need to know the
content of the web page have a reasonable chance to find this
page it is fine. I think the link from package description
to README.Debian is quite direct. You might continue with
this "chain of information" from there to this web page.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: