#962417 ITP: pll-modules -- high level modules for the low level phylogenetic likelihood library (devel)

Package:
wnpp
Source:
wnpp
Submitter:
Shayan Doust
Date:
2025-11-29 16:46:36 UTC
Severity:
wishlist
#962417#5
Date:
2020-06-07 18:41:07 UTC
From:
To:
Subject: ITP: pll-modules -- high level modules for the low level phylogenetic likelihood library (devel)
Package: wnpp
Owner: Shayan Doust <hello@shayandoust.me>
Severity: wishlist

* Package name    : pll-modules
  Version         : 0.0+git20170809.d6cc565
  Upstream Author : , 2016, Diego Darriba
* URL             : https://github.com/ddarriba/pll-modules
* License         : AGPL-3+
  Programming Lang: C
  Description     : high level modules for the low level phylogenetic likelihood library (devel)
 This package provides high level modules for the low level phylogenetic
 likelihood library.
 .
 This package contains the static library and header files.

Remark: This package is maintained by Debian Med Packaging Team at
https://salsa.debian.org/med-team/pll-modules
#962417#12
Date:
2020-07-22 06:52:09 UTC
From:
To:
Hi Thorsten,
there should be a paragraph

Files: debian/missing-sources/testdata
Copyright: none

and the source (download location, scientific paper, etc.) should
be mentioned.  I'm also not sure how to specify the mandatory License
field.

I have a general question:  Wouldn't it be a good idea to keep the WNPP
bug in CC in case of rejects?  I'm doing this hereby manually since I
frequently was wondering why some package is WNPPed for some time but
not uploaded.  Seeking for rejects becomes more and more hard since I
have the feeling search engines stopped indexing Debian lists - at least
its not reliable to find something.  If the WNPP bug would be in CC
this would be very convenient.

Kind regards

        Andreas.
#962417#17
Date:
2020-07-22 14:38:40 UTC
From:
To:
Hi Andreas,

the data itself are facts and as such not copyrightable. But the
compilation of the data might be protected by copyright. As I don't have
any idea what these data are and how they have been created, I have
to assume that they need to be mentioned in debian/copyright.
Please add a comment if you think that the assumption is wrong.

I don't think so. The maintainer gets an email about the reject, the
uploader and probably even the sponsor. So all people involved in that
package are informed.
Of course, you can always send a patch for dak.

   Thorsten