Dear Andreas, Thanks very much for your work on this. I have added your patches to the github version. For the version.h file I think including the debian package revision number is the right thing to do since we can't call git.
Concerning the old ClonalFrame, I would recommend removing it completely since I am no longer going to maintain it and it is superseeded by ClonalFrameML. Best wishes, Xavier On 21 September 2017 at 13:28, Andreas Tille <ti...@debian.org> wrote: > Hi Xavier, > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 01:38:57PM +0100, Xavier Didelot wrote: >> Yes it would make sense to package ClonalFrameML instead of >> ClonalFrame, if that's not too much work of course. > > It was not really much work. ClonalFrameML is now in Debian new queue. > I realised that the README.md says the code is GPL but most source code > files say LGPL - may be you fix this discrepancy. > > I also made some minor patches which I'd recommend to take over: > > > https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/debian-med/clonalframeml.git/tree/debian/patches > > A bit problematic is the creation of version.h. At package build time > I'm not in the Git repository and thus creating version.h fails. It > might make more sense to include it into the download tarball. For the > moment I'm injecting the Debian package revision into version.h. > > To be clear about the clonalframe which contained a GUI: Do you > recommend to remove it at all from Debian or would you consider some > porting effort to Qt5 a sensible thing to do? I had no problems with > other software and may be it is done in about 30min which I would > spent to support some existing users. > > Kind regards > > Andreas. > > > -- > http://fam-tille.de
