IEEE.org     |     IEEE Xplore Digital Library     |     IEEE Standards     |     IEEE Spectrum     |     More Sites

Commit 49823cea authored by Alfredo Herrera's avatar Alfredo Herrera
Browse files

Minutes/2020Week23_2June.md updated from https://stackedit.io/

parent a484ec65
......@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ Updates directly on issue,
|[Maintainer Manual language](https://opensource.ieee.org/community/peer-review/admin/-/issues/19) | @alfredo.herrera | TBD | TBD |
| [Call for participation text]](https://opensource.ieee.org/community/peer-review/admin/-/issues/20) | @alfredo.herrera | TBD | TBD |
| [Context of Open Source Design at IEEE]](https://opensource.ieee.org/community/peer-review/admin/-/issues/21) | @alfredo.herrera | TBD | TBD |
| [Value proposition]](https://opensource.ieee.org/community/peer-review/admin/-/issues/22) | @alfredo.herrera | TBD | TBD |
| | @alfredo.herrera | TBD | TBD |
| | @alfredo.herrera | TBD | TBD |
......@@ -20,11 +21,8 @@ Updates directly on issue,
#### 3. General discussion:
Finally, the following topics were discussed:
- **[\[ACTION ITEM\]](https://opensource.ieee.org/community/peer-review/admin/-/issues/21)** all committee members are asked to help clarify "the context of open source design" at IEEE: what exactly is that context? Linked to publication? Hosting of Open Research? Standards related? Project hosting?
- **[\[ACTION ITEM\]](https://opensource.ieee.org/community/peer-review/admin/-/issues/22)** there is a need to define the value proposition that peer-review adds to open source designs. One way to describe the value proposition was shared on a [LinkedIn article](https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/peer-review-open-source-alfredo-herrera-p-eng-msc-ieee-sm/) and is added here to spark our discussion:
> if two projects start from the same source files, by submitting one of them to planned review(s) by a group of subject-matter-experts (i.e. peers): it is reasonable to expect that through this process the design would gain a higher level of quality than the project that did not use peer-review.
- **[\[ACTION ITEM\]](url)** TB:
- @zack suggested to clarify the "call for participation" template by adding to the first sentence a description of the new IEEE platform. This has been added to [Issue 20](https://opensource.ieee.org/community/peer-review/admin/-/issues/20)
- **[\[ACTION ITEM\]](https://opensource.ieee.org/community/peer-review/admin/-/issues/23)** we discussed the idea of asking IEEE-SA marketing to help us send a "Call for participation" email to all of IEEE; but it was decided to discuss this on our next call
- **[\[ACTION ITEM\]](https://opensource.ieee.org/community/peer-review/admin/-/issues/24)** it was suggested to remove "design" from first bullet in the **"Request for participation"** section of the "Call for participation" template. Issue was created to allow for discussion prior to change.
......@@ -34,5 +32,5 @@ These meeting minutes mark the beginning of use of the Issues functionality in t
> Written with [StackEdit](https://stackedit.io/).
<!--stackedit_data:
eyJoaXN0b3J5IjpbNjcwODc2MTkzXX0=
eyJoaXN0b3J5IjpbLTIwNzMwODI0MjddfQ==
-->
\ No newline at end of file
Markdown is supported
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment