Include Open Source

[matthiasfromm]

Maybe we should differentiate here a bit?

1) Open Hardware e.g. for lab equipment based on open source construction plans or even open source materials.

2) Open Source Software or/and open source code as tools to e.g. work with open research data (e.g. in terms of reproducibility).

Does that make sense? And if, how do we distinguish and label these?

[aleimba]

For all topic suggestions we have an etherpad collecting material and ideas: https://pad.okfn.org/p/OpenScience101topicsuggestions

Pleas vote for this topic at this comment here with a thumps up reaction (click on the +smiley icon in the top right of the comment)!

[kaythaney]

Might break this into some subsections. There's Open Source history, the value proposition, as well as a bunch of interesting angles when it comes to setting up a project for others to contribute to. (Feel free to reuse the WOW materials, too! Under CC-BY! bit.ly/moz_wow).

[aleimba]

Thanks @kaythaney, yes we like the WOW materials very much (were using it for PERSONAS, Code of Conduct etc.).

When I think about open source I only relate to software development, but you're right there are definitely different aspects to it. We might split the topic.

[solstag]

Hello! I stopped by to complain (kkk) about the lack of open source hardware, but I see a comment has brought up the issue. However I'm going to give a different suggestion.

I think in a general introduction to open science we should never introduce 'open source software' or 'open source hardware' or 'open wetware' at the start, but instead emphasize that for science they're both part of a common question, that of research instruments.

Also, that this question is different from the question of open research materials like tissue samples, cell lines and other specimens, mineral samples etc, which deserve their own entry, both in the sense that no 'source' is available for materials and that unlike materials an instrument does not constitute an /a priori/ part of the object being studied.

So my suggestion is for two main topics: "Open Instruments" (hardware, wetware, software) and "Open Materials" (samples, specimens, artifacts etc).

Such an approach emphasizes the perspective of science, and the role of the objects in science, as opposed to other circumstantial clusters related to their 'opening up'. These circumstantial similarities, on the other hand, could and should be explored within specific topics for pedagogical reasons.

Cheers!

[konrad]

That are great suggestions, @solstag! As @matthiasfromm mentioned the term "Open Source" is rather fuzzy and "Open Instruments" and Open Materials" could be one way of making this more precise while still being abstract enough to cover many thing.s