Re: InChI and toolkits

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: InChI and toolkits

Michael Banck
OK, I know this is old, but still.

On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 12:01:47PM +0100, Peter Murray-Rust wrote:
> The InChI code itself does not fit under Sourceforge licenses as the code
> itself is normative and it is important that mutants do not arise. I do not
> know of any Open Source licenses that can manage this. It may be that some
> ideas from Creative Commons will work. If anyone has ideas, we'd be
> grateful.

I see two possibilities here:

1.

Your code/project is so authorative that everybody will just use your
work.  Having a standards body like IUPAC behind it helps here I guess.

Most people in the Free Software world would not think about forking
anything, even less so something standard-ish.  Forks are a pain to
maintain or take on.

One could argue that if a fork is ever getting more attention than the
original project, your idea (or the execution thereof) was bound to
fail.

2.

You do something like what the Apache project did, i.e.  require clear
derivatives to rename their project.  That's why IBM called theirs
`Websphere', AFAIK.

Of course, then you might get into trouble about when a derivative is
required to change name, what if RedHat fixes a bug in your code, do
they have to rename it?  Debian solves this by mostly not thinking about
it, and the Apache project does the same for the Linux distributions.

I am not sure whether there is good license boilerplate for this which
makes sure your project is still considered Free Software, this would
need investigation.


Maybe my above remarks did not help for the situation at hand, but I
think your point of reasoning is not a priori an argument for having
your code be proprietary.

As for Creative Commons, most of their licenses are still considered
non-free by e.g. Debian, though I heard fixes are upcoming which will
make those which are not clearly non-free acceptable.


cheers,

Michael


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
_______________________________________________
OpenBabel-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openbabel-discuss
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: InChI and toolkits

peter murray-rust
At 16:31 15/12/2005, Michael Banck wrote:
>OK, I know this is old, but still.

You will be glad to know that InChI is now being released under LGPL.

InChI has taken off so well that there is indeed a strong degree of
protection by presence.

There are now several things that can be done to enhance InChI.

P.




Peter Murray-Rust
Unilever Centre for Molecular Sciences Informatics
University of Cambridge,
Lensfield Road,  Cambridge CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
_______________________________________________
OpenBabel-discuss mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openbabel-discuss