#Site license uci chemdoodle full
#Site license uci chemdoodle software
#Site license uci chemdoodle free

Second, the primary advantage of open source software is the ability to redistribute code without restriction. Therefore, in this review we attempt to quantify the current level of development and usage of each package as an indirect measure of quality and usability. This is one reason why it is important, when possible, to seek open source software that is under active development and supported by a broad community.

#Site license uci chemdoodle free

First, opponents are right to point out that free software is not free - users of open source software generally take on a much greater burden in supporting the software than with commercial software. There are a few aspects of the open source software debate that we find particularly relevant. Instead, we assert that open source scientific software is a de facto part of the scientific community, and so in this review we catalog those open source packages that fall within the domain of cheminformatics and molecular modeling. Our goal is not to revisit these arguments. Unsurprisingly, those affiliated with commercial scientific software argue that traditional commercial development, with its associated support and continuous development, provides a superior value, while open source advocates feel the benefits outweigh the burdens. The value of open source software in cheminformatics and molecular modeling is somewhat controversial. Such licenses, which we will refer to as “source-available” licenses, have some popularity in academia as they allow source code to be distributed to other researchers in non-profit institutions, but allow the code to be sold to commercial entities.Īdvantages and Disadvantages of Open Source These licenses typically prohibit the redistribution of the source code. Finally, we note there are other software licenses that make source code available, but are not open source licenses.

#Site license uci chemdoodle full

Although copyleft licenses do not prohibit selling software, since the full source code must remain freely available, in practice vendors of copylefted software must commercialize the support of the product, rather than the product itself. The GNU Lesser General Public License (LGPL) is slightly less restrictive version of the GPL used primarily for libraries as it does not require software that uses LGPL licensed software as a library to be licensed under the LGPL.

That is, the source code must remain publicly and freely available. In contrast, copyleft licenses, such as the different versions of the GNU Public License (GPL), require that public redistributions of licensed software remain licensed under a GPL license. This enables source code licensed under a permissive license to be incorporated into commercial, proprietary programs that are not open source. They specifically do not require that redistributions of modified source code be licensed under the same license as the original source code. Permissive licenses, such as the Apache, BSD, MIT, and Python licenses, place minimal restrictions on how modified code may be distributed, such as requiring attribution and limiting liability. Broadly speaking, open source licenses fall into two categories: permissive and copyleft. This is achieved by making the full source code of the software available to users. The unifying theme of open source software licenses is that they allow users to use, modify, and distribute software without significant restrictions. However, as a practical matter, especially with regards to scientific software, such distinctions remain philosophical rather than practical as the most popular software licenses are both free and open source. The distinctions between free and open source software are largely philosophical - the free software movement is primary motivated by user freedoms (“free as in speech, not free as in beer”) while the open source movement is more concerned with promoting an open development model to enhance software quality. Free and open source software (FOSS) is software that is both considered “free software,” as defined by the Free Software Foundation ( ) and “open source,” as defined by the Open Source Initiative ( ).