-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Charles Plessy wrote: > Distribution of this software is prohibited. It may only be > obtained by downloading from Stanford's web site > (http://folding.stanford.edu and pages linked therein). > > I guess that in that case, there would be a link from the Stanford site to > packages.debian.org for instance.
There is a FreeBSD packages which installs the [EMAIL PROTECTED] client by downloading the FAH504-Linux.exe binary from the Stanford website. The Gentoo ebuild works very similar and has been around for a long time. All these installers have been silently approved by the project as they don't violate the EULA. Nick Lewycky wrote a Debian package to install the [EMAIL PROTECTED] client on Debian, fahclient-installer, see: http://bugs.debian.org/261257 http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2004/07/msg00338.html That specific code is no longer available online AFAIK, but I still have a copy which I used to add support for multiple CPUs. I never finished this, due to lack of time, but I can give you the code if you (Zachary Palmer) like. > Do they frequently upgrade ? How long can an old client connect ? In that > case, packaging would be commiting yourself to follow the upgrades > closely. I do not think that it would help our users if the Debian package > would periodically provide a binary which is not allowed to connect. [EMAIL PROTECTED] doesn't update its client regularly. The release cycle is possibly slower than Debian Stable. There has been talk of v6 for several years now, and I think that version just recently went into alpha testing if it made it that far (I'm no longer a beta tester with early access to project info, so I can't verify that). The v4 [EMAIL PROTECTED] client still works eventhough v5 has been out for a long time. Its usefulness is somewhat reduced because there are no more deadlineless WUs handed out by the project, but it still works. I don't think this is a real problem. > Maybe the Debian-Med packaging team could provide you a safety net by > co-maintaining the package and hosting the /debian dir in our SVN repo, so > that you can take holidays without coming back with an obsolete package > and angry users. However, would the package not be actively followed by a > dedicated person, it would be better removed (or not packaged at that > point) I'm also willing to help co-maintain a Debian package for [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm currently the upstream maintainer of qd since Dick Howell passed away, which Claudio Moratti packaged as part of kfolding. Maybe he's interested too? > Lastly, I am not sure that closed-sourceness is the best strategy against > cheating. I guess that the expertise area of [EMAIL PROTECTED] is structural > biology, wheras the expertise of cheaters is... well... cheating. Guaranteeing the integrity of the research is indeed the primary reason to keep the [EMAIL PROTECTED] client and cores closed-source. Even though they are build with GPL components like Gromacs. But "[EMAIL PROTECTED] has been granted a non-commercial, non-GPL license for Gromacs, so [they] are not required to release [the] source." http://folding.stanford.edu/gromacs.html Regards, Bas - -- GnuPG: 0x77A975AD -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGfOS1RWRRA3epda0RAh/SAJ9IbAPuNRXg7khljzERTPAPdOCxcACfVSRe cZe2zKnqrG+ZJACv4Qt3rII= =Rs4C -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
