Your message dated Sat, 2 Jun 2018 23:25:03 +0200
with message-id <bc42260d-18f1-7968-7c85-6846c9f38...@gmx.de>
and subject line Re: Bug#900532: ITP: estscan -- ORF-independent detector of
coding DNA sequences
has caused the Debian Bug report #900532,
regarding ITP: estscan -- ORF-independent detector of coding DNA sequences
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
900532: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=900532
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Steffen Moeller <moel...@debian.org>
* Package name : estscan
Version : 3.0.3
* URL : http://estscan.sourceforge.net/
* License : non-free custom
Programming Lang: C, Fortran
Description : ORF-independent detector of coding DNA sequences
Continues packaging seeded by Bio-Linux, package is team maintained at
https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/estscan
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hello Göran,
On 6/2/18 10:54 PM, Göran Weinholt wrote:
> Steffen Moeller <moel...@debian.org> writes:
>
>> Package: wnpp
>> Severity: wishlist
>> Owner: Steffen Moeller <moel...@debian.org>
>>
>> * Package name : estscan
>> Version : 3.0.3
>> * URL : http://estscan.sourceforge.net/
>> * License : non-free custom
>> Programming Lang: C, Fortran
>> Description : ORF-independent detector of coding DNA sequences
>>
>> Continues packaging seeded by Bio-Linux, package is team maintained at
>> https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/estscan
> Hello Steffen,
>
> I saw "non-free", got curious, and had a look at the license. To me it
> looks fine for main.
>
> I think the reason it might initially look non-free is § 1 (a), but
> before that it says "under one of the following terms", and § 1 (b) is
> no more than what's in the GPL and so clearly should be fine for main.
> Did I perhaps miss something troublesome in the license?
>
They don't allow charging for its redistribution with a fee that exceeds
material/handling/shipping costs.
Thank you for caring!
Steffen
--- End Message ---
