Le Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 08:46:42AM +0100, Peter Rice a écrit : > > So I see no problem for EMBOSS in including the files. > > The only problem is for someone "modifying the files and > redistributing them" without permission ... but strictly that would > not apply to most uses of a UniProt entry (otherwise you could not > use one entry as input and distribute the results). > > The licensing is there to prevent redistribution of UniProt without > permission. > > Anyway, you can just delete them from the Debian duistribution of > EMBOSS - and find your own way to run the QA tests. I don't think we > have a problem.
[answering on Debian Med list only] Hi all, after reflection, I think that the best solution is to upload the emboss package to non-free. This would not change much to our workflow, and would keep an easy way to transfer the packages to our derivatives. This would not make the EMBOSS programs less free than they are — and similarly removing the UniProt records from the test suite would not make the programs more free. I will not work on a package that would pretend having increased the software freedom of EMBOSS by removing these files. Cheers, -- Charles Plessy Debian Med packaging team, http://www.debian.org/devel/debian-med Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
