[Debian-med-packaging] [j.johnson at imb.uq.edu.au: Re: Installation of binary tools inside MEME]
Martin Frith
martin at cbrc.jp
Fri Feb 22 00:56:22 UTC 2013
Hi Andreas,
I have no objections to your suggestion.
Have a nice day,
Martin
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 4:12 AM, Andreas Tille <tille at debian.org> wrote:
> Hi Martin and Timothy,
>
> many thanks for the clarification. While I'm personally not glam or
> meme user I would think that from a Debian packaging point of view it
> would be quite reasonable to take over these changes fully to a glam2
> package. The rationale is that we would like to use the glam2 package
> in connection with the MEME package and it would be simply confusing to
> maintain two different glam2 packages while one is supporting MEME
> options and one is not.
>
> To approach this my idea would be as follows: Fetch the glam2 files
> straight from the MEME archive, create a tar archive containing glam2
> exclusively and adapt the build process to build only the glam2
> executables. Build the Debian binary package glam2 from this source
> archive.
>
> Do you think this is a reasonable way to go and is it correct to keep
> the old public domain license for this code.
>
> Kind regards and many thanks for your cooperation
>
> Andreas.
>
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 01:32:16AM +1000, Timothy Bailey wrote:
> > Martin,
> >
> >
> > On 19/02/13 8:56 PM, Martin Frith wrote:
> > >Hi,
> > >
> > >I would approve of backporting those improvements with the more
> > >permissive license. But I didn't make most (any?) of them. I
> > >also believe the improvements are all cosmetic changes to the
> > >interface, not changes to the algorithm.
> > You are right about the nature of the changes. Thanks for your
> > understaning.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Tim
> > >
> > >Have a nice day,
> > >Martin Frith
> > >http://www.cbrc.jp/~martin/ <http://www.cbrc.jp/%7Emartin/>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 10:51 AM, James Johnson
> > ><j.johnson at imb.uq.edu.au <mailto:j.johnson at imb.uq.edu.au>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Tim, Dave,
> > >
> > > The Debian Med Packaging Team want to know if they can backport
> > > GLAM2 improvements (presuming there are any?) in the MEME Suite to
> > > the more permissively licensed GLAM2 repository?
> > >
> > > ~James
> > >
> > > -------- Original Message --------
> > > Subject: Re: [j.johnson at imb.uq.edu.au
> > > <mailto:j.johnson at imb.uq.edu.au>: Re: Installation of binary tools
> > > inside MEME]
> > > Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2013 11:04:58 +0000
> > > From: Tim Booth <avarus at fastmail.fm> <mailto:avarus at fastmail.fm>
> > > To: Andreas Tille <andreas at fam-tille.de>
> > > <mailto:andreas at fam-tille.de>
> > > CC: Debian Med Packaging Team
> > > <debian-med-packaging at lists.alioth.debian.org>
> > > <mailto:debian-med-packaging at lists.alioth.debian.org>, James
> > > Johnson <j.johnson at imb.uq.edu.au> <mailto:j.johnson at imb.uq.edu.au>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > > On Thu, Feb 14, 2013 at 06:08:08PM +0000, Tim Booth wrote:
> > > > > Yes, I did start looking at Meme but quickly realised it was
> a lot more
> > > > > work than I thought to do a proper job on it. I think all I
> wanted to
> > > > > do in the first instance was to get an updated glam2 binary
> package
> > > > > based upon the improved glam2 source within the meme code. I
> guess this
> > > > > is now the definitive glam2 as the original standalone source
> hasn't
> > > > > been updated since 2008.
> > > >
> > > > We might try to do some comparison. Charles previously
> mentioned that
> > > > we should keep the glam2 package from Debian which is free (PD)
> and meme
> > > > currently has a non-free license (according to DFSG). So if
> glam2 inside
> > > > meme is basically unchanged it might be reasonable to ignore the
> code
> > > > inside meme (or asking upstream for permission to backport the
> changes.)
> > >
> > > A quick "diff" across the original glam2 vs. the meme glam2 suggests
> > > that several new options have been added for meme - see
> > > src/glam2_args.c.
> > >
> > > I would imagine that scripts within meme rely on these options. In
> > > fact, a quick grepping shows that scripts/glam2_webservice.pl.in <
> http://glam2_webservice.pl.in> calls
> > > "glam2 -M" which is an option added for meme. I've not looked for
> other
> > > examples.
> > >
> > > I hope that upstream can at least be persuaded to put their changes
> to
> > > glam2 under a free license like the original glam2. They may not be
> > > legally bound to do so but it would be highly disingenuous of them
> to
> > > refuse.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > TIM
> > >
> > >
> > > -- If you can't find an apposite quote for your sig, just
> > >make one up.
> > > - Anon
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Timothy L. Bailey
> > t.bailey at imb.uq.edu.au <mailto:t.bailey at imb.uq.edu.au>
> > Institute for Molecular Bioscience
> > VOICE: (61)-(7)-3346-2614
> > The University of Queensland
> > FAX: (61)-(7)-3346-2101
> > Brisbane, Qld. 4072 Australia
> > http://research.imb.uq.edu.au/~tbailey
> >
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Debian-med-packaging mailing list
> > Debian-med-packaging at lists.alioth.debian.org
> >
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debian-med-packaging
>
>
> --
> http://fam-tille.de
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-med-packaging/attachments/20130222/5faf87a1/attachment.html>
More information about the Debian-med-packaging
mailing list