Relating to the recent discussion on how scientific software is/should
be paid for, this is a question I have been meaning to bring up for
some time:
Is it possible to get ISI to index the citations to papers published
in the "Computer Program Abstracts" section of J. Appl. Crystallogr.?
We publ
One last reassuring word to the users of TOPAS - if I may
No open source algorithm under any license comes close to equalling those as
implemented in TOPAS and its academic counterpart. This status quo shall
remain.
In the event that commercial entities are locked out of journals then in the
case
Vincent
>For another software with many important contributors it would indeed be
>impossible. But then the software would not have existed in the first place
>with a non-free license, so.
This discussion is getting nowhere; I politely disagree and see no solution;
never is it right to developm
Alan,
> As it stands however the reality of a GNU GPL license is that if a
> manufacture wanted to modify and include a program licensed under it in
> order to sell a larger manufacturing process for commercial purposes then
> they would be denied access unless all 10 people who wrote the soft
Alan
A very good take on the situation and I totally agree that Nature Materials
should provide free access to all of its articles; otherwise it preaches one
thing and practices another.
One of the articles at nature.com concerns Public Library of Science
http://www.nature.com/nature/debates/e-ac
Brian
>I personally feel that open source software is usually in the best
interests of scientific
>methods development.
This is a matter of opinion but even if you are right then no one has the
right to deny non-publically funded bodies the right to practice science.
Science or knowledge
Begin forwarded message:
From what I have read on Nature Methods decision then if the
journals of J.
Applied Cryst and Acta Cryst were to go down the same path then
2000 plus
users of TOPAS and TOPAS-Academic would be without a means of
reading peer
reviewed articles on the algorithms used
> Hi Everyone; Just in case you don't follow ccp4bb or nature methods:
> http://www.nature.com/nmeth/journal/v4/n3/full/nmeth0307-189.html
This does seem to mean that Nature will not accept results obtained with
commercial software, or even free software like GSAS and FullProf, for
which the sourc
Alan,
> You are right in that open source is good at spreading algorithms but no
> one should be locked out by decree. Thus the licensing of software is
> critical; the GNU GPL license including Copyleft is not to be confused with
> something like Python; from the Python web site:
>
> "The
Vincent wrote:
"It is a step forward for F/OSS as it acknowledges that open-source code
allows to spread a new method better than a closed source. As opposed to,
filing a patent - since patents were originally developed to ensure that new
methods be available to all."
You are right in that open s
Alan,
> In the original message of Michael Love (forwarded by Jon Wright) it clearly
> states:
> > Although there are still some small problems, I think that this is a
> > big step forward, and certainly an interesting read, if you are
> > interested in FOSS and science.
> What does "still
11 matches
Mail list logo
