Re: Bioconductor package flowPeaks license Artistic 1.0?

[Giovanni Biscuolo]

Hello zimoun,

zimoun <address@hidden> writes:

[...]

> The issue is really to be able to contact the author. And I am not
> sure this person is even the copyright holder. (In some country, the
> company/institute own the copyright even the code is not written in
> office's hours.)
>
>
> For example, 2 files contains:

[...]

> The most of the files claim:

[...]

> For example, how many packages in Bioconductor use the Artistic 1.0?

Sorry you have to struggle with this tedious work of sorting out YALM
(Yet Another Licensing Mess), but the first thing to do in this case is
to have a list of licenses for each file/folder and see if there is a
way to **workaround** the disappearing of upstream and if needed do some
sort of _soft_ forking just to fix the missing licensing-bits

If we are lucky enough maybe the 95% of this package is free and the
remainging 5% easily replaceable with a free rewrite

WDYT?

Sorry I cannot help you sorting out the licenses in this package (next
year I'm going to refactor my timetable for Guix... but this is another
story)

Thanks! Gio'

[...]

P.S.: like Tobias, I suggest you not to spend time trying to appeal FSF
on the Artistic Licence v.1 ;-)

-- 
Giovanni Biscuolo

Xelera IT Infrastructures