10 quick tips for making your software outlive your job
Authors:
Richard Littauer,
Greg Wilson,
Jan Ainali,
Eman Abdullah AlOmar,
Sylwester Arabas,
Yanina Bellini Saibene,
Kris Bubendorfer,
Kaylea Champion,
Clare Dillon,
Jouni Helske,
Pieter Huybrechts,
Daniel S. Katz,
Chang Liao,
David Lippert,
Fang Liu,
Pierre Marshall,
Daniel R. McCloy,
Ian McInerney,
Mohamed Wiem Mkaouer,
Priyanka Ojha,
Christoph Treude,
Ethan P. White
Abstract:
Loss of key personnel has always been a risk for research software projects. Key members of the team may have to step away due to illness or burnout, to care for a family member, from a loss of financial support, or because their career is going in a new direction. Today, though, political and financial changes are putting large numbers of researchers out of work simultaneously, potentially leavin…
▽ More
Loss of key personnel has always been a risk for research software projects. Key members of the team may have to step away due to illness or burnout, to care for a family member, from a loss of financial support, or because their career is going in a new direction. Today, though, political and financial changes are putting large numbers of researchers out of work simultaneously, potentially leaving large amounts of research software abandoned. This article presents ten tips to help researchers ensure that the software they have built will continue to be usable after they have left their present job -- whether in the course of voluntary career moves or researcher mobility, but particularly in cases of involuntary departure due to political or institutional changes.
△ Less
Submitted 9 May, 2025;
originally announced May 2025.
Cycling on the Freeway: The Perilous State of Open Source Neuroscience Software
Authors:
Britta U. Westner,
Daniel R. McCloy,
Eric Larson,
Alexandre Gramfort,
Daniel S. Katz,
Arfon M. Smith,
invited co-signees
Abstract:
Most scientists need software to perform their research (Barker et al., 2020; Carver et al., 2022; Hettrick, 2014; Hettrick et al., 2014; Switters and Osimo, 2019), and neuroscientists are no exception. Whether we work with reaction times, electrophysiological signals, or magnetic resonance imaging data, we rely on software to acquire, analyze, and statistically evaluate the raw data we obtain - o…
▽ More
Most scientists need software to perform their research (Barker et al., 2020; Carver et al., 2022; Hettrick, 2014; Hettrick et al., 2014; Switters and Osimo, 2019), and neuroscientists are no exception. Whether we work with reaction times, electrophysiological signals, or magnetic resonance imaging data, we rely on software to acquire, analyze, and statistically evaluate the raw data we obtain - or to generate such data if we work with simulations. In recent years there has been a shift toward relying on free, open-source scientific software (FOSSS) for neuroscience data analysis (Poldrack et al., 2019), in line with the broader open science movement in academia (McKiernan et al., 2016) and wider industry trends (Eghbal, 2016). Importantly, FOSSS is typically developed by working scientists (not professional software developers) which sets up a precarious situation given the nature of the typical academic workplace (wherein academics, especially in their early careers, are on short and fixed term contracts). In this paper, we will argue that the existing ecosystem of neuroscientific open source software is brittle, and discuss why and how the neuroscience community needs to come together to ensure a healthy growth of our software landscape to the benefit of all.
△ Less
Submitted 28 March, 2024;
originally announced March 2024.
