Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
35 lines (25 loc) · 2.98 KB

CONTRIBUTING.md

File metadata and controls

35 lines (25 loc) · 2.98 KB
Raw

Contribution guidelines for the OpenPBTA-manuscript

Please see USAGE.md for information on how to use the Manubot for writing the manuscript. Below you'll find information on the contribution workflow for the OpenPBTA manuscript.

Issues

We use issues for discussion of papers, section outlines, and other structural components of the paper.

Pull requests

Contributions to the analysis repository operate on a pull request model. We expect participants to actively review pull requests, with a particular focus on pull requests that include analyses within their areas of expertise.

Authorship

The ultimate goal of this is effort is to describe the results from OpenPBTA-analysis in this manuscript. We expect authors to have contributed to the overall design of the project by participating in issues and to contribute to the text by contributing, reviewing, or informing sections and/or revisions to sections through pull requests in this repository. It is important to note that, for authorship, these should be substantial intellectual contributions to the scientific objective of the work underpinning the manuscript. Authorship will be based on the following criteria (adapted from ICMJE guidelines):

  • Substantial contributions to the conception or coordination and design of the required work and its performance; or the generation, acquisition, processing, harmonization, analysis, and/or interpretation of data/results for the work and its associated knowledge creation activities including;
  • Drafting, critiquing, or revising of the work critically and providing important intellectual input and content as well as;
  • Final approval of the version to be published; AND
  • Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. We will use CRediT taxonomy to record author contributions.

Peer review

All pull requests will undergo peer review. Participants in this project should review pull requests, which can be done using GitHub's review interface. They should suggest modifications or, potentially, directly edit the pull request to make suggested changes. As a reviewer, it's helpful to note the type of review you performed: did you look over the source code, did you run the source code, did you look at and interpret the results or a combination of these?

Before a repository maintainer merges a pull request, there must be at least one affirmative review. If there is any unaddressed criticism or disapproval, a repository maintainer will determine how to proceed and may wait for additional feedback.