Hello all Can I respond generally to the original poster.
I apologize for suggesting that the OP was not registered with this list. My mistake. I must admit to some frustration that academia has been generally slow to recognize the contribution and merit of open projects -- be they software or knowledge-based. On the other hand, peer-review, the supposed mainstay of science, (at least in my experience and observations) routinely under-performs. If those views translated into a personal criticism, then I am sorry. That was not my intention. The question of how best to cite community-generated material for academic purposes is a difficult one. Very often there is no single versioned document. Furthermore, it is difficult to judge whether the material in question is actively maintained or has become orphaned. I don't have real answers though. But this issue is going to grow. For example, published text books on C++ have virtually disappeared over the last decade as the web takes over, despite the language remaining widely used and current. If anyone has views on this topic, perhaps they can respond. Anyhow, good luck to the OP with the Scampi project and their masters thesis. The project looks interesting and my previous comments about software practice in academia do not apply. best wishes, Robbie --- Robbie Morrison PhD student -- policy-oriented energy system simulation Technical University of Berlin (TU-Berlin), Germany University email (redirected) : [email protected] Webmail (preferred) : [email protected] [from Webmail client] _______________________________________________ Help-glpk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-glpk
