Talk:Main Page

From Open Babel
Revision as of 06:21, 2 October 2007 by Ghutchis (Talk | contribs) (Reverted edit of Ramiao, changed back to last version by Ghutchis)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

How do I edit pages? I have created a login (petermr) and this allows me to do most of the mediawiki things on this page but when I go to Chemical Markup Language there is no edit button.


When pages don't exist (e.g., "Chemical Markup Language" right now), you'll see a search results page. This isn't something you can edit directly.

Click on the link that says "No page with this exact title exists, trying full text search." (the link is "exact title") The Wiki software will create a new page and start you editing it.

Oh, before I forget. If you want to create a redirect (e.g., from "CML" -> "Chemical Markup Language") you create a new page like described above. Then add one line.

#REDIRECT [[Chemical Markup Language]]

(the second half of that is simply a link to the new page)


Wikipedia and News section on main

I have opened the Wikipedia entry and what do you think about a news section on the main page?

My future plans are to extend mainly the documentation and adding maybe some mining features to OpenBabel.

Best, Joerg

Added links to (J)OELib

Honor to whom honor is due.

I would like to see links to:

and also see mentioned that OEChem supports now free licenses for non-commercial applications.

Joerg Kurt Wegner 01:40, 1 April 2006 (PST)

Well, we've always had a link to JOELib under Related Projects and to you under Credits. If you're referring to the "heredity" section on the main page, I think it might be time to remove it anyway (better to focus on what we have now and where we're going). As for a link to OELib, that URL has moved around multiple times -- Open Eye doesn't always seem to want people to refer to OELib anymore?
If you'd like an explicit link to JOELib on the main page, please feel free to do so. :-)
If you'd like to add a "news" section, I think that'd be great. I wonder if it's possible to pull the SourceForge RSS feed somehow.
I don't think it's worth linking to OEChem. It's a free-as-in-beer, closed-source license. I think it's questionable whether you could really produce an open source (let alone GPL'ed) product relying on OEChem. Open Eye has *always* had free-as-in-beer licenses for educational and "non-commercial" use. Considering some of the nasty things they've written about open source and Open Babel in particular, I'm not sure they need our link. You might also want to check their license agreement -- they basically say that OE reserves the right to revoke the license if they decide you're doing commercial activities, etc.
My $0.02. Ghutchis 11:48, 1 April 2006 (PST)
I do not see any reason removing the heredity. Keep it on the main page!. And I do not care, if OpenEye likes cross-linking or not. Since they have produced great code and they released it as free Open Source we should acknowledge that. We are working more or less for free, but we are all very sensisitive if we are not named. I think they have the same rights, and if people want to use their tools, then we should support that just by clarifying the heredity.
Especially because I know that they have not stopped producing high quality code. For example they have improved their SMARTS matching by having a compiler expert in-house.
And IMHO we are all great scientists, so presenting informations without any political background is a fundamental principle. People should decide on their own, if they want to use freeware or commercial products. Since I hate religious debates about OpenSource, we should avoid any kind of war in that field. And after some really strange comments in a recent CCL discussion about: 'Software patents in chemistry?': Day 1, Day 2, Day 3, Day 4 I really would like to see a collaboration model of free and commercial Open Source. And I would especially like to see that people start seeing it in that way. Finally, because any kind of Open Source costs something. The question is only if it is maintained for free or on a commercial basis. We just want to have the option to change code on our own for having the ability being innovative.
Joerg Kurt Wegner 13:03, 1 April 2006 (PST)