Prepare the repo for opening #56
Conversation
The `embed_test.py`, anf `run_martinize2.py` are now located in the `bin` directory instead of the root of the repository. It goes the same for `entry_api.py`. In addition, this last script is renamed `martinize2`, and get installed in the research PATH by setup.py.
The martinize2 library get renamed vermouth as it covers more than martinize. This commit renames the library main directory. WARNING: this commit breaks everything as the library is still referred to as martinize2. Yet, making this commit separate should prevent a lot of hassle with merge conflicts.
Fixes #52
jbarnoud
force-pushed
the
make_public
branch
from
dd958a3
to
de131b7
Compare
jbarnoud
force-pushed
the
make_public
branch
from
de131b7
to
8a55841
Compare
|
I just spent 3 hours rebasing my other pull requests against that one. Damn! It was some serious history rewriting! I'll update the PRs when this will be validated. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Most looks good; The issue on licensing data is something to discuss, I guess. I'd be in favour of having a completely open license for that. If these data files are to appear in a database or sent around separately, I wouldn't want to see that as 'derived work' from vermouth.
setup.cfg
Outdated
| @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ | |||
| universal = 1 | |||
|
|
|||
| [metadata] | |||
| name = martinize2 | |||
| name = vermouth | |||
| author = P C Kroon | |||
| author_email = [email protected] | |||
| license = MIT | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Still says MIT as license...
| ; WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. | ||
| ; See the License for the specific language governing permissions and | ||
| ; limitations under the License. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't these have a Data License, rather than a Software License?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would say that the safest is to apply the same license everywhere for the time being. We could apply a different license for the data (CC zero?) but it requires some more discussion, and I would like to open the repo.
This PR prepares the repository to be made public.
@Tsjerk could you have a look? I would like to merge this by tomorrow so I can open the repo. I'd prefer not to merge my own PR without review.