[Debian-med-packaging] Any idea how to ask about a free license for caftools? [EXT]

[Andreas Tille]

Hi again,

Am Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 05:25:53PM +0100 schrieb Andreas Tille:
> Hi James and Robert,
> 
> thanks a lot for your very quick response.  Steffen, you introduced
> this package into Debian.  Could you please add some statement?

Steffen told me in private mail that there is no urgent need for
caftools but it would just nice to have it.  I'm only interested if it
is in main (= would change its license to something that is free per
Debian Free Software Guidelines).  I could colunteer to send a patch for
the files if you would tell me what license is appropriate.

> Am Mon, Mar 14, 2022 at 03:55:22PM +0000 schrieb Robert Davies:
> > > AceDB ended up being relicensed under GPL:
> > > 
> > >    https://github.com/richarddurbin/acedb
> 
> Ahhhh, apropos acedb.  Good to know that this is on Github now.
> Would you mind tagging at least the latest release of it?  Currently
> the Debian packaging code is pointing to ftp.sanger.ac.uk which is
> not the best choice.
> 
> Moreover there is a bug report that acedb is using GTK2[4].  Do
> you consider updating acedb to some more recent GUI toolkit?

Is there any statement about this?
 
> > contributions.  On the other hand, it's also been obsolete for over ten
> > years now, and was written with nothing like modern standards.  Do you know
> > how many people are interested in using it?  Unless there's a fairly big
> > audience, I'm not sure if we could justify the time needed to bring it up to
> > scratch, apart maybe as a very low priority side-project.
> 
> I think for the moment replacing all GRL instances by some common free
> license would be helpful.  You can also consider adopting the patches we
> applied in the Debian package[5] to enable building with modern tools.
> 
Kind regards
 
       Andreas.
 
> [4] https://bugs.debian.org/967243
> [5] https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/caftools/-/tree/master/debian/patches

-- 
http://fam-tille.de