[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#890783: Autopkgtest for prodigal (#890783)

Dear Andreas,

пн, 19 мар. 2018 г. в 14:14, Andreas Tille <andreas@an3as.eu>:
Dear Liubov,

On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 12:47:38PM +0000, Liubov Chuprikova wrote:

> I have tried to find the information that should be placed in d/copyright,
> but unfortunately, I don't have any experience with this kind of stuff. So
> this is what I have found so far:
>    - I downloaded the test sequence from the Ensemble Bacteria, which is an
>    online database of EMBL-EBI. At the bottom of the sequence page
>    <http://bacteria.ensembl.org/Candidatus_carsonella_ruddii_dc/Info/Index>,
>    it is indicated "Ensembl Bacteria release 38 - January 2018 © EMBL-EBI". I
>    couldn't find any license they may have for the data, except that Terms
>    of Use <https://www.ebi.ac.uk/about/terms-of-use> states: "EMBL-EBI
>    itself places no additional restrictions on the use or redistribution of
>    the data available via its online services other than those provided by the
>    original data owners."
>    - At first, the sequence was deposited in the GenBank database (as said
>    in this paper
>    <http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(13)00752-5>). I
>    didn't find if the GenBank has copyright, but they say here
>    <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genbank/>: "NCBI places no restrictions on
>    the use or distribution of the GenBank data. However, some submitters
>    may claim patent, copyright, or other intellectual property rights in all
>    or a portion of the data they have submitted."
>    - Finally, I have found that the sequence itself has no patent (this had
>    to be indicated in the field LOCUS of the GenBank file
>    <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/CP003467?report=genbank> as PAT).
>    I suspect the sequence has no copyright as well, although I can't find a
>    confirmation.
> Could you, please, point me in the right direction. I feel like I'm getting
> stuck.

Thanks for this elaborate information.  I tried my best to condensate it
into d/copyright.  The rule should be that we provide information to the
best of our knowledge (but not more ;-) ).  Please review and add at
least a line

   wget ...
(see FIXME) and may be other information you (as a scientist) might
consider helpful which I might have missed.

Thank you for help! I have added wget link, but it is quite long. Is it ok or it would be better to split it into several lines? Plus, I have replaced the link to the journal article by the one containing DOI (which is more stable).

If there is nothing additional to change, could you please check and upload the package?


Reply to: