Re: seq-gen appears to be non-free
Hi Alex,
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 12:00:38PM +0200, Alex Mestiashvili wrote:
> I did that partially:
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-med/2012/01/msg00241.html
> Andrew Rambaut answered (ignoring CC to debian-med) that He has
> permission from Yang to use this code, which is useless for us in
> licensing question.
OK, thanks for the clarification.
> Zhieng Yang asks to use a forum for questions and bug reports, so there
> was no easy way to CC to debian-med.
> Here is the thread:
> http://www.ucl.ac.uk/discussions/viewtopic.php?f=54&t=9306
Thanks for the link. Stupid clash of incompatible communication
channels, but you did right to ask there - thanks for your effort.
> >> I would like to upload the new version of seq-gen (current watch file is
> >> broken) because there is some number of users according popcon statistics.
> >> How should I proceed now ? simply change section to non-free/science in
> >> the debian/control and upload the new version?
> >>
> > Depending on your answer to my question above it is probably
> > contrib/science and yes if paml can not be freed this would be the way
> > to go.
> >
> Good, than I will prepare the package for non-free.
Unfortunately there seems to be no work around. I have two remaining
remarks:
1. It seems that parts of PAML should be moved to a library (considering
the fact that you suspect that several projects might use this code).
2. I'm sad to see the pool of our packages in non-free growing. It will
increase our maintenance burden and we should really try hard and
regularly talk to upstream to change their license. I'm a bit sad
that our PhyLip effort started at SouthPort[1] was basically ignored.
I wished that people have an opinion on this if they read this list.
It would help if people who not consider signing (which is fine for
sure) could explicitely state their reasons for not doing so to
let those, who are convinced about the petition might make aware about
flaws in their approach. I would really like to seek with higher
effort for successful methods to convince upstream authors.
Kind regards
Andreas.
[1] http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMed/Meeting/Southport2012/ePetition_Phylip
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: