On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 01:44:13PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Hi Matthia,
>
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:42:50AM +0000, Mattia Rizzolo wrote:
> > missing the whitelist bit.
>
> I admit *personally* I lost my motivation to ask for whitelisting. If I
> tried last time (several years ago - so this might have changed) it was
> a longish process and I decided not to spent time in non-free software
that's unfortunately a common situation in too many parts of debian :(
> but rather spent this time in the process of freeing this software. As
> far as I see the chances for Ugene might be not that bad but the package
> itself needs more work to replace code copies of just packaged software.
yeah, that's just plain cool, yes!
But it's something I can't afford to do, so I approach smaller tasks.
> BTW, I'm not convinced that the less powerful architectures will be
> happy about building ugene ...
if mips can build libreoffice and openjdk-9! :P
Anyway, given that you confirmed my fears about nonfree@r.d.o, I'm
building it here and I'm going to do a binary-only upload of it once
done.
This package is blocking the procps transition to complete, that is.
https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/auto-procps.html :)
--
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo
GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`.
more about me: http://mapreri.org : :' :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature