Glad to hear that you are still working on Fungimol and that there is some wider interest. It seems to me that setting things up via SourceForge is not only good practice but significant enough to at least post a brief notice (like your note above) on some of the nanotech lists.

A notice would show that Fungimol is a live ongoing project, and might even attract attention from students, people with work-related needs for such tools and other potential contributors.

Lately there have been some nibbles of interest in Fungimol which is now hosted at SourceForge. In the past, Fungimol was briefly discussed on the nanocad list. However, unless there is some other system that people are also wanting to discuss, the fungimol-devel mailing list is probably sufficient. I didn't post to NanoCAD yet because we don't have a Minimum Publishable Increment yet, in my opinion.

The almost unavailable resource that limits all this is people who are able and willing to write code and aren't too busy working for a living.

The issues Bryan identifies are important ones, and there should be places to discuss them. I have been tinkering with a nanotech-oriented wiki (a form of reader-editable collaborative discussion software) which I can operate via my new, faster, more reliable ISP, available at http://willware.net:8080/cgi-bin/nanowiki/wiki.cgi .

Originally my intent was to provide something like accessible not-too-technical nanotech courseware to casual visitors. But wikis are very flexible and there is certainly a place for the kinds of more involved issues of intellectual property, cooperation, and freedom that Bryan raises.

I would be delighted to offer my wiki to host these kinds of discussions, if folks are interested in using it. And, obviously, Nanodot is also a good place for these kinds of issues.