Re: [Discuss] using GitHub for paper submission and review

Rescience also does everything throught github: http://rescience.github.io/ On 18 October 2016 at 15:29, Robert M. Flight wrote: > You could definitely do the private thing on Gitlab, but if I were going to > do something like this I would go with completely open review. > >

[Discuss] alternative episode order for new Python lesson

Hi everyone, Steve Bond and John Didion used the new "intro to Python for data analysis using Gapminder data" lesson at NIH recently; as well as filling in a bunch of exercises (thanks!), they rearranged the order of the episodes - you can see their version at

Re: [Discuss] using GitHub for paper submission and review

Hi Greg, I'm pretty sure that the Journal of Open Source Software runs its entire review process through GitHub. (Although I'm not sure how many of your dot points their process covers.) http://joss.theoj.org/ There are a number of Software Carpentry people involved with that journal. Cheers,

Re: [Discuss] using GitHub for paper submission and review

You could definitely do the private thing on Gitlab, but if I were going to do something like this I would go with completely open review. The push journal sounds similar, where submissions were managed by GitHub http://push.cwcon.org Robert On Tue, Oct 18, 2016, 6:22 PM Noam Ross

Re: [Discuss] using GitHub for paper submission and review

We've been running rOpenSc package submissions in a similar way for a couple of years and JOSS's process is derived from ours. The main difference is (1) reviews are not anonymous, but public, so no temporary accounts are created or needed, and (2) in our case the author's repo is merged in after