Re: PhiPack license
Hi Trevor,
whoever might care now for the PhiPack code might like to find a patch
to build with modern gcc here:
https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/debian-med/phipack.git/tree/debian/patches/fix_build_error.patch
Any news about the license?
Kind regards
Andreas.
On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 09:58:59AM -0400, Trevor Bruen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Yes - I have contacted D. Bryant who hosts the page. It may take some time to get this sorted out, but I will let you know once resolved.
>
> Trevor
> > On Apr 14, 2016, at 8:38 AM, Andreas Tille <tille@debian.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Trevor,
> >
> > thanks a lot for the quick and helpful response. If the code is "as is" that's
> > fine provided it has a free license.
> >
> > Kind regards
> >
> > Andreas.
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 14, 2016 at 07:47:38AM -0400, Trevor Bruen wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I was contacted via twitter. Yes - I will contact one of my coauthors and look into these matters - he maintains a copy of the program on a public website. It will take me a little time to get this sorted out. The code is not maintained and is strictly “as is”, but I will see if we can add a license to it.
> >>
> >> thanks,
> >>
> >> Trevor
> >>
> >> Hello Trevor,
> >>>
> >>> I'm writing you on behalf of the Debian Med team which is a group inside
> >>> Debian with the objective to package free software in the field of
> >>> biology and medicine for main Debian.
> >>>
> >>> My plan is to package ParSNP[1] for Debian. The download archive
> >>> contains a copy of the executable Profile which according to the ParSNP
> >>> author originates from your code available as a plain tar archive[2].
> >>> Since Debian does not allow binary code without source my task would be
> >>> to turn PhiPack into a Debian package to use this code for ParSNP.
> >>>
> >>> To do so the code is missing a license statemend which permits us to
> >>> distribute PhiPack. I'd suggest some license like GPL, BSD or similar
> >>> common licenses.
> >>>
> >>> It would be also very nice if there would be some homepage with a short
> >>> description of the code which could link to the download archive and the
> >>> according paper[3]. BTW, to provide the paper as documentation we'd
> >>> also need the (LaTeX?)-source. Tagging the tarball with a version would
> >>> also be helpfull - non-versioned files with may be changing content
> >>> would prevent us from noticing possible fixes of the software. IMHO,
> >>> the easiest way to fullfill the above wishes would be to use some
> >>> hosting platform (Github, SourceForge) and move the code there.
> >>>
> >>> Kind regards and thanks for considering a free license
> >>>
> >>> Andreas.
> >>
> >
> > --
> > http://fam-tille.de
>
>
--
http://fam-tille.de
Reply to: