Collaboratively improving code quality in research

[mozfest-bot]

[ UUID ] d6f94c12-037b-4d51-93ca-8f001bbb4548

[ Session Name ] Collaboratively improving code quality in research [ Primary Space ] Open Innovation [ Secondary Space ] Web Literacy

[ Submitter's Name ] Naomi Penfold [ Submitter's Affiliated Organisation ] eLife [ Submitter's Github ] @npscience

What will happen in your session?

This will be an active participatory workshop. We invite researchers, developers, and anyone with a passion for improving code quality to take part. First, we will review code snippets used in biological research. The code will be projected, participants will submit feedback (positive and critical-constructive) as post-its. As a group, we will discuss the feedback and decide which review comments are necessary to address, and which provide important feedback for learning good practises. Second, we will have a guided brainstorming session to identify how to enable researchers to collaboratively improve research code. Keys questions include: which technologies and processes already exist for code review? What are the key features of a collaborative review platform? Does research code present any specific challenges here?

What is the goal or outcome of your session?

Given researchers are not software developers, we're looking for ways to help them to share good quality code but without unintentionally imposing any barriers to sharing code. At MozFest, we seek input from developers, researchers, and others on: What to review in research code? What is vital, and what is important but not necessary? How to review code? Is there a good mechanism to enable inline commenting or collaborative review? How should the reviewer’s feedback be communicated to the author? Ideally, we would like to gather insights into how current review practises in software development could be applied to research, and what needs further thought or development to make the system more relevant to science and not software.

If your session requires additional materials or electronic equipment, please outline your needs.

We will bring a laptop, but a projector would be very handy, thank you! Please could we have lots of post-its (preferably two colours) and pens, a big table or wall, plus big sheets of paper to brainstorm on?

Time needed

60 mins

[npscience]

Hi @mbonsma -the first half of this session proposal is entirely inspired by what I am told you do with your workshops in Toronto. Thank you!

[mbonsma]

@npscience awesome! This is a great idea for a session!

[yochannah]

@npscience This is a great session proposal!

One thought (this is something that comes up in related discussions I've been having about peer reviewing scientific code): does this intend to address address larger-scale codebases as well as smaller snippets and scripts? Reviewing larger codebases oftens seems nigh-impossible and I'm not sure what the good answer for it is.

[npscience]

@mbonsma thanks! Might you have any advice from your experiences?

@yochannah good point. I'd like to tackle that hard question actually. What's reasonable, what's not, etc. All things to consider, and your thoughts very welcome on this. And the feedback we've already gathered on your proposal #71 already helps.

[mbonsma]

@npscience - it's been a pretty foreign topic to people on the few occasions we've done it, and I personally found it very helpful when @linamnt went over a code review checklist with us before starting the actual review. @linamnt, do you remember which checklist you were using?

[linamnt]

@npscience I used the Mozilla Science Guidelines here. Good luck!

[npscience]

Thank you both! @mbonsma @linamnt

[bunnybooboo]

Just to chip in and mention I had the pleasure of hearing @npscience speak of this open project during Global Sprint. Not only a top class presenter, also highly engaged attendees, surrounding feedback and problem solving on issues each of us might have had in regard to publication and access to science. Mozfest would be a perfect platform. Best of luck with your proposals Naomi!

[npscience]

@bunnybooboo David, that's so lovely, thank you. You were a very welcoming audience, and always great to get some new perspectives on the issues, thank you for that. See you at MozFest!

[Saallen]

Hi @npscience this session has not been accepted under a space - but we can have this session take place in our emergent session areas- that sits outside the space- let me know if this is of interest?

[npscience]

Hi @Saallen - thanks for the consideration. Yes that could be of interest. However, I feel #71 is a more compelling event, and I would be happy to attend/participate in that one in lieu of this. Plus, the comments already collected around the topic on that thread go some way to helping to answer some of the Qs set out above.

I would be happy to leave this, should you feel my attention could be better spent participating in some of the other sessions.

Many thanks!

[Saallen]

Hey- ok It looks like you are already deep in conversation with #71 so I will close this session. If you do join forces with that group let me know as would be eager to follow. Think there is lots of space there to co facilitate