JOSS publication

[IndrajeetPatil]

Closes #1633

If you want to read a PDF containing the latest changes, you can look at the artefacts uploaded by run of the latest workflow that renders it.

---

If you aren't familiar with JOSS, as an example, see the paper on {tidyverse}.

For more, see: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/submitting.html

---

TODO:

• Wait for the next release (since the draft uses all_linters() function).
• Resolve Provide an easy way to format lint messages with user-specified width #1884 (this will make sure that the lint messages don't overflow in the PDF output)
• Decide whether to include both examples that do and don't lint, or only the former. Since the lint message suggests the alternatives that won't lint anyway, I don't see the need to repeat examples.
• Decide on the authors and the order of the authors.
• Acknowledge funding sources, if relevant

[IndrajeetPatil]

@jimhester, @MichaelChirico, @AshesITR I have put together a rough first draft and can already use some feedback from you on whether the draft seems like a good first step.

Feel free to make edits. Also, we can skip CI to save some energy, since there are no code-related changes in this PR. We can run the workflows once the PR is ready for a merge.

Thanks.

[jimhester]

I think what you have is a great start, thanks for writing it up!

Do papers in JOSS typically try to measure impact in any way? e.g. through number of reverse imports / suggests, GitHub references or CRAN downloads?

I also wonder if we should mention the age / maturity of the package in some way, to contrast it with other packages that are maybe not as seasoned.

[IndrajeetPatil]

I think what you have is a great start, thanks for writing it up!

Do papers in JOSS typically try to measure impact in any way? e.g. through number of reverse imports / suggests, GitHub references or CRAN downloads?

Typically, no.

I also wonder if we should mention the age / maturity of the package in some way, to contrast it with other packages that are maybe not as seasoned.

Thanks for the comment, Jim. I think it makes sense to highlight these aspects. Here is a paragraph I have added to the "Benefits" section. WDYT?

Finally, {lintr} has had a large and active user community since its birth in 2014 which has contributed to its rapid development, maintenance, and adoption. At the time of writing, {lintr} is in a mature and stable state and therefore provides a reliable API that is unlikely to feature any breaking changes.

[MichaelChirico]

GTG I think. I don't have a good sense of the standards JOSS is aiming for so not sure when the marginal benefit from improving will drop off. Thanks so much for driving this!!

cc @jimhester / @AshesITR for any other high-level comments.

[IndrajeetPatil]

GTG I think. I don't have a good sense of the standards JOSS is aiming for so not sure when the marginal benefit from improving will drop off. Thanks so much for driving this!!

@MichaelChirico I think good examples to give you a feel for their standards, you can have a look at these papers (combined estimated reading time ~ 30 min): [1], [2], [3]

cc @jimhester / @AshesITR for any other high-level comments.

@jimhester, @AshesITR: If you want to read a PDF containing the latest changes, you can look at the artefacts uploaded by run of the latest workflow that renders it. (I've also updated my top-level comment with this info.)

[IndrajeetPatil]

@jimhester, @russHyde, @fangly, @renkun-ken Can you please check your affiliations and also update the affiliation and ORCID (if available)?

Also, if you have time, it would be great to get some feedback on the draft of the paper :)

(Please see the top-level comment in this PR for context)