>In article <5c45cv$l96 at dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>, gilbertd at bio.indiana.edu (Don Gilbert) writes:
>|> I tend to agree with David Mathog's general view here.
>|> The removal of source code with GCG seems to be a big loss
>|> for the user/manager community of this software package.
>|> I think I understand the economic forces behind this,
I too was concerned, but mostly because my users use EGCG as a suppliment
to GCG. I emailed both Peter Rice and GCG asking about the issues. What I
(1) If I need an enhanced version of a GCG program, they will do it for me
and post the binary for retrieval via ftp.
(2) Peter Rice and John Devereaux are working closely together to ensure
that Peter can continue to widely distribute EGCG.
(3) GCG actual source code was showing up in comptetor's projects with the
GCG copywrite notice removed.
(4) For existing customers, there will be a way to continue to receive source
code (it will cost, but that is a reasonable thing to do). As I am NOT an official
spokeman, please don't ask me for more details of this. I am sure that the GCG
folks will announce it when the details are finalized.
>|> and respect
>|> the company's move to this. GCG software has been a leader
>|> among bioinformatics packages, and part of that was due to its openness
>|> and accessibility to a manager/developer group of biocomputists.
>|>>|> - don
>|> -- d.gilbert--biocomputing--indiana u--bloomington--gilbertd at bio.indiana.edu
University of Nebraska
cprice at molbio.unmc.edu
(402) 559-9527 (T-Thurs)