Hi Diane,
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 11:36:17AM -0700, Diane Trout wrote:
> > BTW, I'd love if you would merge your work to master branch. I'm a
> > bit
> > confused by the amount of branches and lost track which one to look
> > at.
>
> I verified which was which and deleted the obsolete branch.
>
> use detrout-python3-try2 (the only detrout branch that should be left)
Thanks. Just let me know if you want me to try rebuilding your work.
> > This reminds me to the debian/README.source files ftpmaster once
> > suggested for R packages[1]. May be that's an apropriate way to
> > document the licenses? Feel free to find examples for instance
> > in the package r-cran-ape.
>
> I really wish that listing the citation for these early scientific
> datasets counted as complying with the license.
Since it is accepted for the R packages and the data are refering
to R data I do not see any reason why this should not be accepted.
As far as I understood Yaroslav he agrees with me that if all
fails patching the docs to not use the data would be a temporary
solution otherwise.
While I have not tried to build the current status I wonder what you
think about #873512. I'm perfectly fine with your solution to exclude
some tests - I just wanted to give a hint that there is a potential
upstream patch.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
