Software license review ref

[yoavram]

I'm not sure if this fits, but (Morin and Urban 2012) is a very good review of software licenses for scientists. It might fit in the 2nd paragraph of the Introduction or in Use Cases: 8. Lowering barriers to reuse.

Morin A, Urban J, Sliz P (2012) A Quick Guide to Software Licensing for the Scientist-Programmer. PLoS Computational Biology 8: e1002598. Available:http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002598

[karthik]

Thanks Yoav. I cited it but still wondering if I am making good sense by bringing in the open science argument. Carl correctly points out that git can exist without open science (no one needs to share) but it can certainly enhance it. And one cannot really use any of this unless there is a licence that permits remixing and reuse.

So it might just be that I need to clearly make that connection rather than assume the reader will.