Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
The GNU General Public Licence is, in my opinion the optimum, at
present for complete programs, but many of the components of medical
record systems might well be delivered under the GNU Lesser or Libray
Licence which is less fussy about use with secret-source software.
Other licences to consider include the BSD and Mozilla licences as
these offer more latitude for developers in some ways, but the key point
to understand is that the benefits to providers of software to (at least )
General Practice in the UK do not derive from unique posession of the
source code, but from customers buying services including but not limited
to:-
consulting on choice of system;
specification of system and hardware;
installation;
support;
training;
writing or adapting further software
Only dissatisfied customers would leave their current suppliers if
the two conditions of the source code being publicly available and libre
and there being other companies ready to effectively support users of it
existed.
No public good comes of dissatisfied customers not being able to
change maintainers, and in the long run the companies can only prosper by
satisfying their customers, and GP computing can only advance at the pace
demanded if GPs have confidence in their control of their data systems.
Licencing
The GNU General Public Licence is, in my opinion the optimum, at
present for complete programs, but many of the components of medical
record systems might well be delivered under the GNU Lesser or Libray
Licence which is less fussy about use with secret-source software.
Other licences to consider include the BSD and Mozilla licences as
these offer more latitude for developers in some ways, but the key point
to understand is that the benefits to providers of software to (at least )
General Practice in the UK do not derive from unique posession of the
source code, but from customers buying services including but not limited
to:-
consulting on choice of system;
specification of system and hardware;
installation;
support;
training;
writing or adapting further software
Only dissatisfied customers would leave their current suppliers if
the two conditions of the source code being publicly available and libre
and there being other companies ready to effectively support users of it
existed.
No public good comes of dissatisfied customers not being able to
change maintainers, and in the long run the companies can only prosper by
satisfying their customers, and GP computing can only advance at the pace
demanded if GPs have confidence in their control of their data systems.
Competing interests: No competing interests