@annemscheel The best guidance on this is https://t.co/6i7Sms7uLZ by @arfon @danielskatz @kyleniemeyer & @force11rescomm: there's no single rule, but in most cases we should cite in our paper the pkgs that our claims depend on, just as we would for papers & books https://t.co/vEDrM0esbP
@atrisovic @PKoppenburg @LHCbExperiment There are indeed software citation principles (https://t.co/Zup1ZuO9My), similar to paper citations. Referring to the #doi would be great, if you have one. Otherwise zenodo might be a good place to get a persistent identifier.
@GaelVaroquaux "What software should be cited is the decision of the author(s) of the research work in the context of community norms and practices, and in most research communities, these are currently in flux." from https://t.co/ApY7FxKczZ until it is a norm, not sure we can get too angry.
@MOSAICgroup1 And another piece of research software which has no DOI on it's own. Not present on @ZENODO_ORG. (Guide: https://t.co/jGIass98U9) I wonder if the software citation principles are really that unknown? https://t.co/vIDtISCoV8. And no LICENSE file in code repo as well...