(5.1.3) Trickey : Most of the issues associated with this section seem to be generic to the practice of scientific research and not specific to DFT. Those issues include the sociology of science, national funding policies (note Krylov's contribution (5.1.2)), priorities, and mandates (e.g., data management plans in the USA), institutional practices and policies (e.g., tenure and promotion in the USA compared to say China or Germany or México). Given that enormously variegated setting and given the sprawling utilization of many-fermion DFT in myriad diverse specialities and technologies, one might ask whether there are DFT-specific aspects of dissemination, communication, and/or data management, for which the DFT development community has explicit responsibilities and/or opportunities. One such DFT-specific aspect has been pointed out by Loos in his contribution (5.1.1). But as usual there is a hitch. First, just because a DFA (or KEDF) is implemented for some kind of Gaussians, this doesn't mean that it will work for a plane-wave PAW code. (It may not even work for another kind of Gaussians without some fiddling.) Secondly, there are mis-implementations. (The B3LYP DFA itself is a kind of mis-implementation and there are the notorious VWN versions.) Postdocs in my group have found several mis-implementations in popular codes and one of our finite-temperature DFAs was mis-implemented in libxc. Especially for intricate DFAs (and KEDFs), it seems healthier to have several independent implementations.