[Neurodebian-devel] Adding a resting-state fMRI toolbox to the repository

[André Hoffmann]

Thank you very  much for your thoughts on this!

I take it that it’d be best for me if I either create a separate package that contains the fsliolib in the non-free section or integrate the library directly into my code and then make the whole thing a non-free contribution.
I think the latter one would be the easiest, since it would require me to add only one package as opposed to two (Disclaimer: it’s my first contribution to NeuroDebian and thus I’m not exactly fluent in all the processes involved).

Would there be any drawbacks in making the whole thing non-free? To use the package one would have to add the non-free repository anyway, so it should amount to the same, right?
What license would I use in that case?

Best,
André

On 29 Jul 2014, at 12:42, Gert Wollny <gw.fossdev at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 2014-07-29 at 10:05 +0200, Yury V. Zaytsev wrote:
>> On Mon, 2014-07-28 at 23:07 +0200, Gert Wollny wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 2) Pick a license
>>> 
>>>> - GSL, GPL
>>> 
>>>> and maybe(see issue #1):
>>>> - FSL, http://fsl.fmrib.ox.ac.uk/fsldownloads/
>>> 
>>> FSL license states "You are not permitted under this Licence to use
>>> this Software commercially." which makes it incompatible with the GPL.
>> 
>> ... which is only a problem if you *distribute* the binaries, really.
>> 
> Yes, but since this is supposed to become a contribution Debian, this is
> quite relevant.  
> 
>> If you make GSL optional and compile the Debian package with GSL
>> disabled, then it works (at least in this respect, as I'm not sure about
>> other aspects of the FSL license, which I haven't read). Just thought
>> I'd point this out explicitly...
> 
> If you go this way and depends directly on FSL, then the package would
> have to go into the contrib section, since it would depend on a non-free
> package. 
> 
> Regarding the fslio library: the source code is actually still in the
> nifti source package, it is just not compiled, because the copyright is
> not cleared, see: 
> 
> https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/09/msg00026.html
> 
> One thing one could do is to make the FSLIO a dynamically loadable
> library that injects this functionality if installed (think plug-in) and
> that is provided by and extra package that depends on FSL, or uses the
> questionable licensed fslio code. This package could then go into
> non-free or contrib and. 
> 
> Best regards, 
> Gert 
> 
> 
>