Community packages: have two sections, open source (OSI approved) and other

[certik]

Currently all the packages in https://fortran-lang.org/packages/ have OSI approved open source licenses. See also https://github.com/fortran-lang/fortran-lang.org/blob/master/PACKAGES.md#package-criteria which has the same criterion (OSI approved license).

We should add a new section "other", or "commercial" or "not open source" that would list packages that have non OSI approved license. Some examples:

• MUMPS (Maintainance PR for webpage #259)
• VASP
• the NAG Fortran Library
• Numerical Recipes (in Fortran)
• perhaps packages like ANSYS, NASTRAN, ...
• Original Matlab: https://fortran-lang.discourse.group/t/compiling-the-original-matlab/1074
• ...

I believe there are quite a few codes out there where you have to request permission to access, but are written in Fortran. We can list all those.

[awvwgk]

How do we evaluate proprietary or closed-source software?

Say somebody wants to add Turbomole, Crystal or AMS to the list. Do we reach out to the development team and inquire if their software is indeed Fortran and if they want to be listed here? I don't think we can rely on community members that by chance have seen the source code or happen to be associated with those projects to help us review such request, due to potential conflicts of interest.

[certik]

@awvwgk I don't know. Say for Crystal, you can see at https://www.crystal.unito.it/platforms.php that they require Compilers | Intel Fortran Compiler XE 14.0.1.106 / Intel C/C++ Compiler XE 14.0.1.106, so that suggests that at least part of the code is in Fortran. For Vasp you can use https://www.vasp.at/wiki/index.php/Installing_VASP.6.X.X which says Fortran (at least F2008 compliant), and for Turbomole you can use the manual https://www.turbomole.org/downloads/doc/Turbomole_Manual_7-5.pdf which mentions Fortran several times.

So we can use the public "knowledge" of such codes to determine candidates and then we can reach out to the company with a draft entry and see if they can confirm if it is indeed in Fortran and if they want it listed here and to approve or improve the entry (decription, tags, category, ...).

What should be the criteria? "Substantial parts of the core functionality written in Fortran"? Given the commercial nature, obviously we cannot independently verify that, but we can simply trust the claims, and if it turns out later that something does not really satisfy the criteria, we can always remove it.

[certik]

The longer term idea is that just like we list commercial compiler vendors at https://fortran-lang.org/compilers/ and several of them participate on our Discourse, we should foster similar collaboration with commercial software built using Fortran.