rOpenSci Package Reviewing Guide

To review a package, please begin by copying our reviewer template and using it as a high-level checklist. In addition to checking off the minimum criteria, we ask you provide general comments addressing the following:

We encourage you to use automated tools to facilitate your reviewing. These include:

Please be respectful and kind to the authors in your reviews. Our code of conduct is mandatory for everyone involved in our review process.

First-time reviewers may find it helpful to read some previous reviews. Here are reviews of rusda, textreuse, and Ropenaq. The review of dbhydroR uses our up-to-date reviewer’s template.

We encourage you to ask questions and provide feedback on the review process on our forum.

Submitting the Review

Review follow-up

Authors should respond to the review within 2 weeks with their changes to the package in response to your review. At this stage, we ask that you respond as to whether the change sufficiently address any issues raised in your review. We encourage ongoing discussion between package authors and reviewers, and you may ask editors to clarify issues in the review thread, as well.