ProtHint license question

[npavlovikj]

Hi,

I was thinking of creating conda package for ProtHint in order to include it as a dependency in the newest bioconda package for "braker2". However, looks like the license of ProtHint prohibits redistribution, and thus a package can not be created. I was wondering if there is any possibility for the license to be more permissive in future? As of now, users can install "braker2" via bioconda and manually install ProtHint within the environment, so they can still use its functionality.

Thank you, Natasha

[conchoecia]

I second this - would you consider allowing someone to create a conda package? It is difficult to get this software to work given all of the dependencies and requirements for the various genemark components. Thank you-

[tomasbruna]

Hello,

I definitely agree; it would be great to have a conda package. By the way, thank you @npavlovikj for offering to do so, sorry I did not reply to your original offer.

Unfortunately, the license-related matters are out of my hands, I am trying to make it more permissive, hopefully, it will happen in the future :)

Best, Tomas

[npavlovikj]

Thank you for the update @tomasbruna ! I hope you will be able to figure out the license matter soon. When that happens, please let me know, and I would be more than happy to make conda package for ProtHint :)

Thank you, Natasha

[tomasbruna]

Awesome, thanks, I will let you know.

[holmrenser]

Following up on this after comments in https://github.com/Gaius-Augustus/BRAKER/issues/290.

It seems that ProtHint distributes diamond, which uses the GPLv3 license. It is my understanding that GPLv3 mandates that you use the same license. How can this be reconciled with ProtHint's more restrictive license?

Edit: it seems spaln uses a similar (GPLv2) license, which also prohibits imposing additional restrictions.

[tomasbruna]

Hello,

it's reconciled based on this FSF FAQ: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#GPLInProprietarySystem

However, in many cases you can distribute the GPL-covered software alongside your proprietary system. To do this validly, you must make sure that the free and nonfree programs communicate at arms length, that they are not combined in a way that would make them effectively a single program.

DIAMOND and Spaln communicate with the rest of ProtHint at "arms length" by only communicating via command line calls in userspace (https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#MereAggregation).

There is a similar interpretation here: https://opensource.stackexchange.com/a/7080.

With all that said, I agree that GPLv3 license would be a much better fit for ProtHint and it would remove all this ambiguity.As I said, I hope this switch will happen soon (right now I'm waiting for permission to do it).

Best, Tomas

[holmrenser]

Thanks for the clarification, I learned a bit more about software licensing! I agree GPLv3 would be a good fit for ProtHint, as it would ease distribution significantly. I'll keep an eye out for updates!

[abretaud]

Hi! Any news on a potential license change?

[tomasbruna]

Hi @abretaud, it's still on my list, but also still out of my hands. I am working on a larger ProtHint update, fixing the license problem is one of the priorities in this update. Tomas

[abretaud]

Ok, good to know :)

[conchoecia]

Still praying for an open ProtHint without licensing from genepro

[bgruening]

Is there any news about this issue?