Hello Peter, First of all, interesting question :). Generally, I would suppose both approaches are correct: on the one hand those workflows are a defined set of processing rules in an explicit format, like software is the implementation of algorithms. More detailed, it is a script, processed by an interpreter (= Galaxy). On the other hand, those rules are on a more or less abstract level (does that matter?) and carry somewhat creativity (well, just the uplink to *Creative* Commons...). I would redirect your question to the counter question "How similar is the saved workflow to software code?". Means: is there a file or a database entry, which is comparable to an (interpreted) programming language (-> software)? Or is it more similar to a markup language like XML, which is indeed the case for some other basic elements in Galaxy (-> document)? Hope that helps... Looking forward to some more replies, Cheers, Sebastian Peter Cock schrieb:
Hello all,
A philosophical question - for my Galaxy tools and wrappers, I have been using open source software (OSS) licences, e.g. the MIT license, or GPL.
For licensing my Galaxy workflows, should I also treat them as software and do the same, or as a protocol document and go for something like one of the Creative Commons licenses? e.g. CC BY, or CC BY-SA
Thanks,
Peter ___________________________________________________________ Please keep all replies on the list by using "reply all" in your mail client. To manage your subscriptions to this and other Galaxy lists, please use the interface at: http://lists.bx.psu.edu/
To search Galaxy mailing lists use the unified search at: http://galaxyproject.org/search/mailinglists/
-- Sebastian Schaaf, M.Sc. Bioinformatics Faculty Coordinator NGS Infrastructure Chair of Biometry and Bioinformatics Department of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology (IBE) University of Munich Marchioninistr. 15, K U1 (postal) Marchioninistr. 17, U 006 (office) D-81377 Munich (Germany) Tel: +49 89 2180-78178