Comment The Big Read (Score 2) 796
A decade isn't very long in book years, so I'd recommend browsing through the top list from BBC's 2003 survey The Big Read.
--
E.R.
A decade isn't very long in book years, so I'd recommend browsing through the top list from BBC's 2003 survey The Big Read.
--
E.R.
As several people have said earlier, it would be sloppy not to include a citation to any software you use when you write a scientific text. I've more often experienced the opposite problem; trying to find an article to cite for a piece of software I've needed to use. At times you cannot find such articles and hence you are forced to refer to some web page inststead. Which of course will be down the exact day the referee reads your article. I've never met anyone who are reluctant to cite the software they use. After all, a scientific article on the software frees them from the responsibility of describing every piece of it themselves.
So, to the licensing issue; I'd strongly recommend sticking to one of the standard licenses. It really helps the people who want to use your code (and hence will cite your articles). For every new license your users must consider, they will be forced to decide wether or not they can use your code together with other stuff they need. If they want their program released as free software, and particularly if they want it included in e.g. Debian they will probably steer away from unusual or non-DFSG-compliant licenses. Your supervisor wants them to use your software (even though he might not know that) because usage generates citations.
Trust your users, they will cite you. (And give them the BibTeX entry to your article to make it easier for them.)
<<<<< EVACUATION ROUTE <<<<<