MOPAC naming (was: Re: [ghemical-devel] new releases)

[Tommi Hassinen]

On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Michael Banck wrote:

> What's the thing about mopac7?  Is the '7' part of the name, or just a
> version number.  As in, was there a mopac6 earlier?  If yes, shouldn't
> the package be named mopac-7.00 (or mopac-7.1 or mopac-8.0 or
> something)?  Or is this some kind of interface/implementation API
> version?

I think that using names mopac-7.00 or mopac-7.1 or mopac-8.0 would
suggest that the program is actively developed further. This is not the
case, I have just packaged the program as a library for easier access, and
I don't want to rise any false hopes. Also in literature there are
separate references for mopac5, mopac6 and mopac7 and they might even have
different copyright status (mopac7 being in public domain).

If one is interested in developing the semiempirical methods in mopac7
further, perhaps it would be better to have a new clean start with C/C++
instead of modifying the original fortran-77 sources.

Regards,

	Tommi