38 Peer review facilitates package publishing
38.0.1 rOpenSci
aims and goals:
rOpenSci fosters a culture that values open and reproducible research using shared data and reusable software.
We do this by: - Creating technical infrastructure in the form of carefully vetted, staff- and community-contributed R software tools that lower barriers to working with scientific data sources on the web
Creating social infrastructure through a welcoming and diverse community
Making the right data, tools and best practices more discoverable
Building capacity of software users and developers and fostering a sense of pride in their work
Promoting advocacy for a culture of data sharing and reusable software.
Source: https://ropensci.org/about/
38.0.2 rOpenSci’s open peer review process
Authors submit complete R packages to rOpenSci.
Editors check that packages fit into rOpenSci’s scope, run a series of automated tests to ensure a baseline of code quality and completeness, and then assign two independent reviewers.
Reviewers comment on usability, quality, and style of software code as well as documentation.
Authors make changes in response.
Once reviewers are satisfied with the updates, the package receives a badge of approval and joins rOpenSci’s suite of approved pacakges.
Happens openly, and publicly on GitHub in issues.
Process is quite iterative and fast. After reviewers post a first round of extensive reviews, authors and reviewers chat in an informal back-and-forth, only lightly moderated by an editor.
Source: https://numfocus.org/blog/how-ropensci-uses-code-review-to-promote-reproducible-science
38.0.3 rOpenSci’s Guidance and Standards
What aspects of a package are reviewed?
- high-level best practices:
- is the code reusable (e.g. follow the DRY principle)?
- are sufficient edge cases tested?
- etc
- low-level standards:
- are naming conventions for functions followed?
- did they make the best choices of dependencies for the package’s intended tasks?
- etc
Source: https://numfocus.org/blog/how-ropensci-uses-code-review-to-promote-reproducible-science
38.0.4 rOpenSci’s Review Guidebook
38.0.5 rOpenSci-reviewed packages:
38.0.6 Let’s look at an rOpenSci review!
All packages currently under review: https://github.com/ropensci/software-review/issues
38.0.7 What do you get for having your package reviewed by rOpenSci?
- valuable feedback from the knowledgeable editors and reviewers
- help with package maintenance and submission of your package to CRAN
- promotion of your package on their website, blog and social media
- packages that have a short accompanying paper can be automatically submitted to JOSS and fast-tracked for publication.
38.1 pyOpenSci
- A new organization, modelled after rOpenSci
- scope is Python packages
- First package submitted to pyOpenSci was in May 2019