On Wednesday 14 November 2007 12:02:04 Charles Plessy wrote: > Hi all, > > I had a look at the Vienna package, and here are a few thoughts about > the work to be done. > > - It uses a patched version of Readseq. Maybe we should consider to > build Vienna on Debian's readseq, possibly by adopting its patches if > they are not disruptive. By the way, we could incorporate the Debian > package for readseq in our repository, if its current maintainer > agrees. I do not have any preference. Redundancy should be avoided. This is also why I decided for the Vienna RNA package to include the RNAforest application from Bielefeld rather than packaging the Bielefeld version.
> - The Vienna package provides libraries that other programs use. For > instance, MiRanda, a sofware to discover targets of micro RNAs uses > Vienna's RNAlib. yip, it is an essential package. I did not have a look at the libraries yet. Their "make install" needs some fiddling. > - Emboss provides some wrappers so we shoud probably package them as > well. Nice. > - There are some build issues such as the Makefile in the Kinfold > directory that has no distclean rule. Probably some autoconf mastery > can solve the problem. Which is beyond me. There are some static libraries being produced, which is also just slightly disturbing. > - The vienna-rna source package should probably be split into multiple > binary packages, for instance RNAforester which is a distinct work. Right. It comes from the authors auf RNAhybrid. > - I do not have the impression that some commercial licences are sold, > so maybe we have a chance of obtaining a relicencing ? The license is kind of the same as with ClustalW, IIRC. Many thanks for your feedback, Charles. Please feel free to get a go at whatever you feel being most important. Cheers, Steffen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
