# Should we consider BinDeps abandoned?

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/should-we-consider-bindeps-abandoned/23616>\
**Category:** General Usage\
**Tags:** question\
**Created:** [April 28, 2019, 12:22pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/should-we-consider-bindeps-abandoned/23616 "2019-04-28T12:22:08Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 9\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![lobingera](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/lobingera/32/211_2.png) [@lobingera](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/lobingera)\
**Post date:** [April 28, 2019, 12:22pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/should-we-consider-bindeps-abandoned/23616/1 "2019-04-28T12:22:08Z")

</div>

The last commit was jan10th, the last merge aug14th 2018, the last release aug15th 2018. Several PRs are pending (incl. [\>1.0/1.1 changes preventing `BinDeps.debug()` by IanButterworth · Pull Request #395 · JuliaPackaging/BinDeps.jl · GitHub](https://github.com/JuliaPackaging/BinDeps.jl/pull/395)).  
In [dlopen/dlcose change · Issue #397 · JuliaPackaging/BinDeps.jl · GitHub](https://github.com/JuliaPackaging/BinDeps.jl/issues/397) Elliot is cited with

> The old world of BinDeps.jl fades slowly into the long, dark sleep of forgotten heroes.

At the same time i see it registered into General and Stefan’s changes 4 days ago.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![kristoffer.carlsson](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/kristoffer.carlsson/32/22_2.png) [@kristoffer.carlsson](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/kristoffer.carlsson)\
**Post date:** [April 28, 2019, 12:26pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/should-we-consider-bindeps-abandoned/23616/2 "2019-04-28T12:26:45Z")

</div>

> [@lobingera](#):
>
> At the same time i see it registered into General and Stefan’s changes 4 days ago.

Everything in METADATA is registered in General, and there have been a few PRs to General that have touched almost any file. So I wouldn’t consider this as any sign of activity regarding BinDeps itself.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jonathanBieler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/82dd89/32.png) [@jonathanBieler](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/jonathanBieler)\
**Post date:** [April 28, 2019, 12:50pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/should-we-consider-bindeps-abandoned/23616/3 "2019-04-28T12:50:26Z")

</div>

The list of packages depending on BinDeps should give you an idea of why it can’t be abandoned (yet):

[https://juliaobserver.com/packages?dependent\_id=BinDeps](https://juliaobserver.com/packages?dependent_id=BinDeps)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gnimuc](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/gnimuc/32/2194_2.png) [@Gnimuc](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Gnimuc)\
**Post date:** [April 28, 2019, 1:34pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/should-we-consider-bindeps-abandoned/23616/4 "2019-04-28T13:34:12Z")

</div>

We have to use it for those deps that don’t allow shipping pre-compiled binaries.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![lobingera](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/lobingera/32/211_2.png) [@lobingera](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/lobingera)\
**Post date:** [April 29, 2019, 8:32am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/should-we-consider-bindeps-abandoned/23616/5 "2019-04-29T08:32:47Z")

</div>

OK, i’ll ping the “current” developers if they have an idea how to proceed.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![StefanKarpinski](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/stefankarpinski/32/24_2.png) [@StefanKarpinski](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/StefanKarpinski)\
**Post date:** [May 2, 2019, 7:21pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/should-we-consider-bindeps-abandoned/23616/6 "2019-05-02T19:21:15Z")

</div>

Which are those and why can’t you ship pre-compiled binaries? Is it a legal restriction or a technical one?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Gnimuc](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/gnimuc/32/2194_2.png) [@Gnimuc](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Gnimuc)\
**Post date:** [May 3, 2019, 12:04pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/should-we-consider-bindeps-abandoned/23616/7 "2019-05-03T12:04:08Z")

</div>

The former. Research-only code like [BLOSSOMV](http://pub.ist.ac.at/~vnk/software.html) has a very strict non-commercial license which does not allow anyone to [redistribute the code and its derivatives(binaries)](https://github.com/mlewe/BlossomV.jl/pull/15).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![StefanKarpinski](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/stefankarpinski/32/24_2.png) [@StefanKarpinski](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/StefanKarpinski)\
**Post date:** [May 3, 2019, 12:14pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/should-we-consider-bindeps-abandoned/23616/8 "2019-05-03T12:14:40Z")

</div>

One work-around may be to write a builder and provide instructions for people to generate and use their own BB binaries. I also don’t think that we can support non-free software like this as a dependency in General.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![StefanKarpinski](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/stefankarpinski/32/24_2.png) [@StefanKarpinski](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/StefanKarpinski)\
**Post date:** [May 3, 2019, 12:21pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/should-we-consider-bindeps-abandoned/23616/9 "2019-05-03T12:21:51Z")

</div>

Oh, and it may be worth reaching out to the authors to see if they’d be willing to grant an exception for the BB situation. They could obviously continue to require non-commercial usage only. We could maybe have a `NonCommercial` registry where non-commercial-only packages and packages that depend on them live. That way if you install that registry, you’re clearly and explicitly non-commercial and no one can claim ignorance for using the software non-commercial commercially.