Timeline for How do you cite a Github repository?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S May 7, 2020 at 14:49 | history | suggested | TheTechRobo the Nerd | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
updated link
|
| May 7, 2020 at 13:14 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S May 7, 2020 at 14:49 | |||||
| Jan 18, 2018 at 10:41 | comment | added | Bar | I'd ralso ecommend the Journal of Open Source Software, it's a NUMFocus project, completely free AFAIK, and is designed to be developer friendly: joss.theoj.org | |
| Jul 28, 2014 at 16:12 | comment | added | E.P. | Thank you so much for this. I have been looking for some time for an alternative to Computer Physics Communications which is Cost-Of-Knowledge compatible. This seems to fit the bill very nicely. | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 21:02 | comment | added | Faheem Mitha | @cboettig Well, clearly one would only make a Debian package for fairly Unixy software. Most scientific software would work only on one of Windows and Linux anyway. | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 17:47 | comment | added | cboettig | @FaheemMitha Yes, I was mostly referring to the comment string on that post, which reflects varied opinions of reviewing the software, rather than the contents of my post; sorry. Yes, Debian packages assure at least basic metadata are provided, but clearly are not ideal for a Windows audience, for example. Other package systems provide other +'s and -'s. JORS makes the authors speak to each of these issues. | |
| Dec 4, 2013 at 17:05 | comment | added | Faheem Mitha | @cboettig Thanks for the link. I read your blog article. It was good, though a little too R specific. Do you have any idea of the current turnaround time between submission and a decision for JORS? Personally, I think a good thing to do is create a Debian package for your software. If done properly, it automatically addresses a bunch of issues. | |
| Dec 3, 2013 at 20:44 | comment | added | cboettig | @FaheemMitha I've reviewed for the JORS and agree completely with this answer. Yes, I reviewed the code as per the JORS reviewer guidelines. I've reviewed 'Software Papers' in traditional domain journals, and occasionally gotten editorial pushback for my reviewing the code as well as the paper: see carlboettiger.info/2013/06/13/what-I-look-for-in-software-papers.html | |
| Dec 2, 2013 at 14:03 | comment | added | user7112 | Just to clarify, for future visitors of this question. I have just joined the Editorial board of the journal. However, this answer was written when there was no "competing interest". | |
| Nov 13, 2013 at 3:23 | comment | added | Faheem Mitha | Nice review of the Journal of Open Research Software. I've never heard of this journal before, and I'm impressed by your description of its review process. I'm particularly impressed that they critiqued the code. If anyone else has submitted there, can you comment? | |
| Nov 13, 2013 at 2:07 | vote | accept | charlespwd | ||
| Aug 2, 2021 at 14:47 | |||||
| Nov 12, 2013 at 15:59 | history | edited | F'x | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 3 characters in body
|
| Nov 12, 2013 at 15:52 | history | answered | user7112 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |