This is a work-in-progress emerging from the DataONE Prov-a-thon meeting (August 2017, New Mexico). We’re still working on the guidelines, and warmly welcome feedback, especially as a issue post.

---

DataONE Reproducible Research Compendia Onboarding

Thank you for considering submitting your research compendium for the DataONE reproducibility review process. All compendia go through a process of open peer review to ensure a consistent level of quality for our users, inspired by the rOpenSci package onboarding process. This process also allows us to ensure that your compendia meets our guidelines and provides opportunity for discussion where exceptions are requested. The origin explains why parts of the guidelines assume a compendium based the programming language R and its tools, but compendia in other languages and from all communities of research are welcome and documentation will be steadily improved.

• Why submit your compendium for DataONE Reproducible Research Compendia Onboarding?
• Why review for this?
• How to submit your compendium
• Useful documents in this repository
• Editors and reviewers

Why submit your compendia for DataONE review?

• First, and foremost, we hope you submit your compendia for review because you value the feedback. We aim to provide useful feedback to compendia authors and for our review process to be open, non-adversarial, and focused on improving software quality.
• Once aboard, your compendia will continue to receive support from the DataONE community. You’ll retain ownership and control of of your compendia, but we can help with ongoing maintenance issues such as those associated with updates to R and dependencies.
• Compendia reviewed here can be cross-listed with other repositories.

Why review compendia for DataONE?

• As in any peer-review process, we hope you choose to review to give back to the DataONE and scientific communities. Our mission to expand access to scientific data and promote a culture of reproducible research is only possible through the volunteer efforts of community members like you.
• Review is a two-way conversation. By reviewing compendia, you’ll have the chance to continue to learn development practices from authors and other reviewers.
• The open nature of our review process allows you to network and meet colleagues and collaborators through the review process. Our community is friendly and filled with supportive members expert in R development and many other areas of science and scientific computing.
• To volunteer to be one of our reviewers, please let us know by opening a new issue and providing your contact information and areas of expertise. We are always looking for more reviewers with both experience in reproducible research and domain expertise in the fields compendia are used for.

How to submit your compendium for review

• Consult our policies see if your compendia meets our criteria for review
  • If you are unsure whether a compendium meets our criteria, feel free to open an issue as a pre-submission inquiry to ask if the compendium is appropriate.
• Follow our compendia style guide to ensure your compendia meets our style and quality criteria.
• Next, open a new issue in this repository and fill out the template.
• An editor will review your submission within 5 business days and respond with next steps (see editors guide for details). The editor may assign the compendia to reviewers, request that the compendia be updated to meet minimal criteria before review, or reject the compendia due to lack of fit or overlap.
• If your compendia meets minimal criteria, the editor will assign 1-3 reviewers. They will be asked to provide reviews as comments on your issue within 3 weeks.
• We ask that you respond to reviewers’ comments within 2 weeks of the last-submitted review, but you may make updates to your compendia or respond at any time. We encourage ongoing conversations between authors and reviewers. If you update your compendium, please leave a short notice in your issue about the change. See the reviewing guide for more details.
• Once your compendium is approved, we will provide further instructions on transferring your repository to the DataONE repository.

Our code of conduct is mandatory for everyone involved in our review process.

Our review process is always in development, and we encourage feedback and discussion on how to improve the process on our issue tracker.

Useful documents in this repository

• policies.md - policies as to what compendia to accept and how to conduct the review process
• reviewing_guide.md - high-level guide for reviewers
• packaging_guide.md - detailed requirements and recommendations for compendia
• editors_guide.md - steps for editors to take throughout the review process
• reviewer_template.md - a template and checklist for reviews
• editor_template.md - a template and checklist for editors’ preliminary review
• issue_template.md - automatically-used template and checklist for authors upon submittal
• review_request_template.md - template for e-mails to prospective reviewers
• news_template.md - a template for authors to use for NEWS files in their compendia.

Editors and reviewers

DataONE’s onboarding process is run by:

• Ben Marwick, University of Washington
• Carl Boettiger, UC Berkeley
• Daniel Nüst, University of Münster