From owner-chemistry@ccl.net Mon Oct 17 17:24:00 2011 From: "James Eilers jeilers-$-siue.edu" To: CCL Subject: CCL: Science code manifesto Message-Id: <-45669-111017162132-31236-tG+6s6i+CvhtFEqHQcwAyg[A]server.ccl.net> X-Original-From: James Eilers Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-5--874230954 Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 15:21:08 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Sent to CCL by: James Eilers [jeilers-,-siue.edu] --Apple-Mail-5--874230954 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think you need to parse their sentence more carefully. I don't see it as applying to any of the widely used Computational Chemistry codes--- either those that are open source, or those that are licensed, patented, and/or copy write protected. "All source code written specifically to process data for a published paper must be available to the reviewers and readers of the paper." On Oct 14, 2011, at 4:18 PM, Brian.James.Duke{:}gmail.com wrote: > I just encountered the Science Code Manifesto, which essentially > states > that all computer code used for scientific analysis and modeling > should > be available for review. It appears to have started with the Climate > Code Foundation. I encourage you to visit the web site and consider > endorsing the Manifesto. > > Note that this is not specifying open source code, so GAMESS(US), > GAMESS(UK), DALTON etc., as well as open source codes such as PSI3 amd > MPQC satisfies the points of the manifesto. Of course some other > quantum > chemistry codes do not. I think we should be putting pressure on the > authors of such codes to meet the criteria in this manifesto. > > Brian. In climate/weather science, where there may be a lot of "our computer models show", there may good reason for such a manifesto; but we don't need one, and I doubt that many areas of science do Jim James E. Eilers Professor Chemistry Department Southern Illinois University Edwardsville (618)650-3559 --Apple-Mail-5--874230954 Content-Type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I think you need to parse = their sentence more carefully.  I don't see it as applying to any = of the widely used Computational Chemistry codes--- either those that = are  open source, or those that are licensed, patented, and/or = copy write protected. 

"All source = code written = specifically to process data for a published=20 paper must be available to the reviewers and readers of the = paper."
On Oct 14, 2011, at 4:18 PM, = Brian.James.Duke{:}gmail.com wrote:

I just = encountered the Science Code Manifesto, which essentially states
that all computer code = used for scientific analysis and modeling should
be available = for review. It appears to have started with the Climate
Code = Foundation. I encourage you to visit the web site and = consider
endorsing the Manifesto.

Note that this is not specifying open source code, so = GAMESS(US),
GAMESS(UK), DALTON etc., as well as open source codes = such as PSI3 amd
MPQC satisfies the points of the manifesto. Of = course some other quantum
chemistry codes do not. I think we should = be putting pressure on the
authors of such codes to meet the criteria = in this manifesto.

Brian.

In = climate/weather science, where there may be a lot of "our computer = models show", there may good reason for such a manifesto; but we don't = need one, and I doubt that many areas of science = do
Jim

James E. Eilers

Professor

Chemistry Department

Southern Illinois University Edwardsville

=

(618)650-3559   

=

= --Apple-Mail-5--874230954--