@computingnature
@pyOpenSci
I am pretty positive yes - it's much more about code review than I have seen be typical of journal review of code papers. huge variation there ofc, I've done reviews for journals that only cared about validating the claims made in the paper re: results and didn't care about code review at all, but others did.
so ime it is complementary! and part of it is also about helping bridge best practices from those ppl very involved with core python ecosystem with researcher-programmers to make a curated index of packages that meet some minimal standards for usability, documentation, and testing.
just an idea! obvs it's extra work but it's way more fun work than trad peer review :) (and it's a really lovely group of people to yno talk about ur work with)
@jonny @computingnature hey Carsen! it is ok if your package is under Journal review. we are not a publisher, we focus on code and packages that will be useful to the open science community over time. The main scope items are:
1. it needs to be a package that you do plan to maintain after review.
2. it needs to be in our scope which you can read more about here - https://www.pyopensci.org/software-peer-review/about/package-scope.html
pls feel free to ask any other questions!!