From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ricardo Wurmus Subject: Re: [PATCH]: gnu: Add STAR. Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2015 10:40:21 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87twyu7kee.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39695) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YL7JM-0000qB-Rj for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 04:41:10 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YL7Iz-0000Ce-U0 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2015 04:40:52 -0500 In-Reply-To: <87twyu7kee.fsf@gnu.org> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: Guix-devel Ludovic Court=C3=A8s writes: >> + (license license:gpl3))) > > GPLv3-only? Actually, searching the source tree shows me that LICENSE includes the "or (at your option) any later version" phrase; but the included copy of htslib that is built as part of the STAR aligner is MIT licensed. I'll update the license field to ;; STAR is licensed under GPLv3 or later; htslib is MIT-licensed. (license (list license:gpl3+ license:expat)) Is this appropriate? ~~ Ricardo