search

openjournals / paper-JOSS-oneyear

Paper describing design and first-year of JOSS
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
0 stars 0 forks source link

PeerJ R2C2 #9

Closed kyleniemeyer closed 6 years ago

kyleniemeyer commented 6 years ago

Section 1

Related to the above, a bit wider discussion on the open science aspects would be appreciated (still within the scope of this particular article). I support the open software movement related to open science, but there are drawbacks and criticisms as well. Which aspects do you explicitly not resolve in this set up? The authors mention the ethics of open source in the beginning and describe at the end the issue of software development, but not the openness part. How does this journal contribute to the wider development of open science practices (open access clearly, but beyond open data to open software)? This is a subject which could be described in the introduction a bit more rather than taking it for granted

arfon commented 6 years ago

Open source software is a core tenant of open science and JOSS encourages this?

kyleniemeyer commented 6 years ago

I'm also not entirely sure what drawbacks/criticisms of the open software movement the reviewer is referring to...

kyleniemeyer commented 6 years ago

How does this journal contribute to the wider development of open science practices (open access clearly, but beyond open data to open software)?

Considering we are explicitly a journal publishing open source software (it's in the name!), the contribution to that aspect of open science should be fairly explicit and obvious. Is the reviewer suggesting that they only see us contributing to open access?

I suppose in addition to a response, there can be a stronger/more explicit connection made at the beginning... I'll take a stab at it.

kyleniemeyer commented 6 years ago

I've added a sentence at the end of the introduction reflecting what @arfon wrote:

JOSS also supports the broader open-science movement by encouraging researchers to share their software openly and follow best practices in its development.

but I'm not sure what else we need to say.

arfon commented 6 years ago

but I'm not sure what else we need to say.

I think what we have in 7c825e8 and in the response to the reviewer is sufficient.

kyleniemeyer commented 6 years ago

@tracykteal suggested we replace

However, the drawbacks or criticisms of open-source software the reviewers refers to are not clear to us.

with

We appreciate that there are ongoing discussions about challenges and opportunities in open source. That has been discussed, extensively and well, elsewhere, and is beyond the scope of this article. This journal is meant to support those who have decided to make their software open source and encourage good practices in their open-source software work.

which I agree with, and have updated in the response document.