ReproHack Meets Code Check Minutes

ReproHack Meets Code Check Minutes === ###### tags: `Minutes` `Meeting` `ReproHack` `Templates` :::info - **Location:** https://meet.google.com/ehm-jmsg-iro - **Date:** April 20, 2019 15:00 PM (UTC+1), 11:00 AM (UTC-3) - **Participants:** - Anna - Daniela - Florencia - Linda - Stephen - Daniel ([o2r](https://o2r.info), CODECHECK, https://nordholmen.net/) - **Agenda** 1. Intros, plans & hopes 1. Compare review processes - CODECHECK - certificate as main output ("code works now") > credit for CODECHECKer - compared to [ReScience C](https://rescience.github.io/) - variations of review/dialogue > https://codecheck.org.uk/process/ - communication during check currently not documented - Feedback form fields - ReproHack feedback form: https://docs.google.com/forms/u/1/d/e/1FAIpQLSembkNEg3qN0SKxmf6cR4z2Cla47pOhfZ9GCKh5J9KUi1wpcw/viewform - ReproHack form includes question on reusability, also questions such as: "After attempting to reproduce, how familiar do you feel with code and method used in the paper?" - Review platform - Collaboration with journals for output publications and reviewer credit - Training 2. Areas of potential collaboration: - Reprohacks to train CODECHECKers - Pool of reviewers to support "negotiations" with reviewers - Become member of https://github.com/orgs/codecheckers/teams/codecheckers/ - Output/Feedback of Reprohack as Codecheck Certificate (??) - DN: yes! - ReproHacks using CODECHECK platform? - DN: no "platform" to use, but the principles can possibly help understanding of participants; maybe the community review process is useful? - Code Check as a Source of papers -- via publishers 3. Tips for raising funds - eg the Mozilla Mini-grant 3. How the focus of ReproHack and CODECHECK differ: * ReproHack's focus: * learning community * making mistakes and learning from them * welcoming those from less computationally heavy fields * getting people to talk and meet about code, best practices, data sharing etc * CODECHECK's focus: * making code review part of publication process * giving reviewers credits for their work * making code checking the norm * encouraging code checking -- Credits to Reviewers (on Certificate) * encouraging code sharing -- Certificate * (DN) not by design, but practically the codechecker community members are more likely to be experienced with software/scientific programming/reproducibility, at least mid term - **Reference:** - https://codecheck.org.uk/ - https://github.com/reprohack/reprohack-hq - Join Reprohack slack: https://reprohack-autoinvite.herokuapp.com/ - Remote Reprohack: https://n8cir.org.uk/events/remote-reprohack/ - ReproHack paperlist (for submitting papers): https://sheffield-university.shinyapps.io/n8cir-reprohacks/ ::: :closed_book: Tasks -- - [ ] Get involved in talks with eLife - [ ] Train the trainer events - [ ] Joint Funding opportunities ## Notes  Differences: - Certificate: