search

jtebert / kilosim

Kilobot simulator optimized for performance and code transferability
https://jtebert.github.io/kilosim/index.html
MIT License
6 stars 0 forks source link

Add license #44

Closed jtebert closed 5 years ago

jtebert commented 5 years ago

Possibly MIT?

r-barnes commented 5 years ago

https://choosealicense.com/

jtebert commented 5 years ago

I'm submitting a paper on 9/15 where I want to cite this. Given that licenses are intimidating to people like academics, and this isn't something that really has appeal to any company, I'm still leaning most strongly toward MIT. Any thought?

r-barnes commented 5 years ago

I think MIT is a solid choice.

r-barnes commented 5 years ago

Also, the code itself could potentially be submitted somewhere, e.g. JOSS.

jtebert commented 5 years ago

I'm not familiar in general with publishing code, but that looks interesting. At the very least I was figuring we could connect it to Zenodo and get it a DOI. (Something I haven't done before but figure is probably a good idea.)

r-barnes commented 5 years ago

Zenodo+DOI is a good idea for increasing cite-ability. JOSS will does their own doi, but also has a peer review process. The two are not mutually exclusive.

jtebert commented 5 years ago

Reading through the JOSS submission info, it says "Upon successful completion of the review, authors will make a tagged release of the software, and deposit a copy of the repository with a data-archiving service such as Zenodo or figshare, get a DOI for the archive, and update the review issue thread with the version number and DOI."

So it looks like that's included/required for their process as well.

jtebert commented 5 years ago

I can punt the JOSS/DOI topic to another issue.

On the license: what's the standard for listing the copyright holder(s) in the license when there are multiple contributors?

r-barnes commented 5 years ago

I'm not sure what the standard is, I'm afraid.