[SciPy-Dev] SciPy 1.0 paper writing proposal

[Andrew Nelson]

I'm obviously up for being on the paper :-), but I'd prefer to contribute
by writing small sections/editing of a paper rather than coordinating.

On 21 January 2018 at 14:08, Tyler Reddy <tyler.je.reddy at gmail.com> wrote:

> Sounds good -- I'd be up for committee work. Definitely +1 on a paper for
> time justification, etc.
>
> On 20 January 2018 at 14:03, Ralf Gommers <ralf.gommers at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> TL;DR, let's write the long journal paper on SciPy that we've wanted for
>> a while, let's form a small committee to coordinate, and get it out the
>> door in 2-3 months.
>>
>>
>> Motivation
>> ---------------
>> (credits for most of this text: Evgeni)
>>
>> Many scipy contributors' day jobs are in academia. Bibliometry -- papers
>> in
>> refereed journals and citations of papers by other papers -- is one of
>> the main
>> performance indicators in most academic establishments. Since we do not
>> generate papers, scipy contributions are all but invisible for the
>> purposes of a
>> contributor's annual report. Of course, details vary wildly; in many
>> cases a
>> contributor manages to balance their time, or to argue common sense with
>> their
>> superiors, or get an approval for scipy work, or just ignores the issue
>> altogether -- but sooner or later there is a form to be filled or boxes
>> to be
>> checked, and scipy contributions simply do not fit in. A peer-reviewed
>> journal paper on scipy will help contributors get the academic credit they
>> deserve.
>>
>> We can write *the* paper for SciPy 1.0, with overall project structure,
>> goals, etc., and for specific features/modules a focus on say the last 3
>> years.
>>
>>
>> History
>> ----------
>> For SciPy 1.0 we had three targets on the publicity/credits front: an
>> interesting release announcement, interesting blogs/stories (NumFOCUS blog,
>> Hacker News, etc.) and a paper. We didn't have the bandwidth for a paper in
>> the end, the rest was successful.
>>
>> [1] is a previous announcement on this list about writing (a) paper(s) on
>> SciPy. We wanted both "short papers" to cover one or two releases (target
>> journal JOSS) and a full paper as the authoritative reference for SciPy.
>>
>> We had an earlier attempt for a "short paper", it's mostly written but
>> has stalled (see [2]). We ran out of steam on that one. To avoid that this
>> time around, it would be good to have a clear public plan, target dates,
>> and a small committee rather than one person to drive things forward.
>>
>>
>> Proposal
>> ------------
>> Here's a proposal for all aspects of this exercise that I can think about
>> now. Some parts stolen from the AstroPy paper [3] (because their process
>> worked quite well).
>>
>> Form a small coordination committee of 3-5 people that set up the paper
>> structure, move things along when parts stall, propose/take decisions as
>> needed, invite co-authors, and organise paper submission/rework.
>>
>> Paper writing to be done by whoever volunteers for a section, not just
>> the coordination committee. First outline/structure to be done by
>> committee, which then asks for review of structure and volunteers for
>> section writing.
>>
>> Scope: a 6-10 page paper, covering history, package scope and structure,
>> community/organisational aspects, key features and recent enhancements per
>> module, and roadmap.
>>
>> Authorship: anyone who made a substantial contribution in the history of
>> the project. Here "substantial" is interpreted as anything beyond a
>> one-line doc fix. Rationale: better to be too inclusive than exclusive.
>> Sign-up via a web form, we send the link to that form to all email
>> addresses in the commit history till v1.0.
>>
>> Author order (details tbd by committee):
>> 1. The SciPy Developers
>> 2. Maintainers, paper writers, other key contributors - in order of
>> contribution level
>> 3. All other authors - alphabetically ordered
>>
>> Submission target: mid-April, to either PeerJ Computer Science or Journal
>> of Open Research Software (tbd by committee).
>>
>> Comments? Volunteers for committee?
>>
>>
>> References
>> ----------------
>> [1] https://mail.python.org/pipermail/scipy-dev/2016-August/021474.html
>> [2] https://github.com/scipy/scipy-articles/pull/4
>> [3] https://github.com/astropy/astropy-v2.0-paper
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Ralf
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> SciPy-Dev mailing list
>> SciPy-Dev at python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> SciPy-Dev mailing list
> SciPy-Dev at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/scipy-dev
>
>


-- 
_____________________________________
Dr. Andrew Nelson


_____________________________________
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/scipy-dev/attachments/20180122/f9376370/attachment.html>