Yep, open source is a basic concept of this approach. Hence, I could
imagine that the Eclipse Foundation respectively the Science and
LocationTech WGs could become key players in the field as follows:
A) Reproducibility -> there are good techniques/practices at the
Foundation to build software continously (CBI, Hudson, ...)
B) Code review -> it's a common practice to use Gerrit to review
submitted code and having mentors to assist newbies
C) Legal issues -> the foundation has thorough knowledge to
balance industries, universities and developers needs
D) Release management -> there is extensive knowledge how to
orchestrate and release projects
E) Code management -> all projects use Git, hence it's easy to
create a tag for a certain DOIed release/package
A citation through DOIs could increase the visibility of both
working groups and thus would bring reward to its authors and gain
further interest by universities and industry.
Best,
Philip
Am 16.04.2015 um 19:59 schrieb Scott
Lewis:
On 4/16/2015 8:32 AM, Peter A wrote:
Hi,
I would be interested in joining that Hangout. The
situation is a little bit of a mess right now. Besides
authors not getting acknowledgement there is the
reproducibility issue. Different implementations of the
same algorithm can have very different results. When I
review a paper I try to remind people to cite the software
and the specific version. I know of at least a couple of
cases where performance claims were invalid because they
used software with a known "bug" in it.
I've been lazy and haven't bothered to publish papers for
most of my software. Used to get e-mails from people asking
how to cite it since there was no paper. I now think people
have learned how to cite webpages better.
For everyone's info: There is a 2014 book from CRC Press called
Implementing Reproducible Research [1]. There two chapters that
discuss the use of OS practices in the conduction of science
research, and they make points wrt reproducibility similar to
those Peter has made above. One of those chapters is by Millman
and Perez, and in keeping with many of their points they've made
the chapter available via github [2]. :)
My point with this reference is to support what Peter is saying
WRT reproducibility, but also to point out the other ways that
open source...both in the creation of scientific software and in
research practice/process...can/could/will/is benefiting the
conduction of scientific research.
My $0.03: I perceive that there is a great hunger in research
communities for the now clear benefits of using open source
practices: collaboration, transparency and the resulting
improvements in communication and education, technical innovation,
cross-org and cross-discipline information sharing, as well as the
rigor and scalability that comes from 'good practice/process'
(e.g. releng) and associated tooling...to mention but a few ;).
In other words: +1
Scott
[1] http://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9781466561595
[2] https://github.com/fperez/repro-chapter-oss
_______________________________________________
science-iwg mailing list
science-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/science-iwg
_______________________________________________
science-iwg mailing list
science-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/science-iwg
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
OpenChrom - the open source alternative for chromatography / mass spectrometry
Dr. Philip Wenig » Founder » philip.wenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxx » http://www.openchrom.net
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|