On 03/04/2017 09:13 AM, Dwivedi, Bhakti wrote:
Hi,
I have a few general questions. With such a rigorous peer-review
process in place for new package submissions in Bioconductor, I was
wondering if there is a way to assess the package acceptance rate?
One could summarize the number times the '3a. accepted' (118) tag is
associated with closed issues, versus '3b. declined' (9; packages are
sometimes marked as 'declined' for reasons not related to the review
process; packages reviewed in the same issue, e.g., software and
experiment data packages, are only counted once).
https://github.com/Bioconductor/Contributions/issues
We (I) view the review process as an opportunity to improve the
technical quality of submitted packages (the output of the review
process is a technically better package than the input), rather than to
pass judgment on scientific merit or impose an absolute threshold on
technical quality. I'm not sure how this fits with standard measures of
academic contribution.
The reason I asked, I want to include the Bioconductor package
citation in my NIH bio-sketch; however, given the format
requirements, I cannot provide a URL and the unfortunately the
release citation is not recognized similar to a citation for a
typical journal article. Have anyone thought of a Bioconductor
software journal? Is there a better way to cite a package that I am
unware of? Would appreciate your help and suggestions.
Not sure what you mean about 'cannot provide a URL' but in case it's not
known the url https://bioconductor.org/packages/<YourPackageHere> always
points to the current release version of your package or, if a new
package and only available in devel, the devel version.
The F1000 Bioconductor channel represents one publication venue, with
the emphasis there on utility of the package within the overall
Bioconductor ecosystem.
https://f1000research.com/channels/bioconductor
Also, I am really interested in becoming a Bioconductor
member/participant and volunteering as a code/documentation reviewer
or contributor to a part of a project. Is there someone I can contact
to achieve this or get an idea of what may be required to get there?
We would like to enable more widespread community participation in the
review process, and will try to provide an update in the not too distant
future.
Martin Morgan
Bioconductor
Thank you.
Regards,
Bhakti
________________________________
This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for...{{dropped:11}}
_______________________________________________
Bioc-devel@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel
