[Paper Review] Developing the best practices for research software registries and repositories

Thomas E. Morrell, Alice Allen|arXiv (Cornell University)|Apr 2, 2021

Scientific Computing and Data ManagementDecision Sciences9 citations

TL;DR

This paper presents nine actionable best practices for scientific software registries and repositories to enhance discoverability, transparency, and long-term preservation of research software. Developed by the FORCE11 Software Citation Implementation Working Group, the framework guides creators in establishing public policies on scope, authorship, metadata, usage, privacy, retention, and end-of-life procedures, ensuring trustworthiness and sustainability across research disciplines.

ABSTRACT

This talk, for the INCF Neuroinformatics Assembly 2021, discusses the Best Practices for Research Software Registries and Repositories" from the FORCE11 Software Citation Implementation Working Group Task Force. It outlines the development of the practices, a summary of each practice, and next steps. The full best practices are available in this preprint: A. Monteil, A. Gonzalez-Beltran, A. Ioannidis, A. Allen, A. Lee, A. Bandrowski, B. E. Wilson, B. Mecum, C. Fan Du, C. Robinson, D. Garijo, D. S. Katz, D. Long, G. Milliken, H. Ménager, J. Hausman, J. H. Spaaks, K. Fenlon, K. Vanderbilt, L. Hwang, L. Davis, M. Fenner, M. R. Crusoe, M. Hucka, M. Wu, N. Chue Hong, P. Teuben, S. Stall, S. Druskat, T. Carnevale, T. Morrell, "Nine Best Practices for Research Software Registries and Repositories: A Concise Guide," arXiv 2012.13117 [cs.DL], 2020.

Motivation & Objective

• Address the lack of standardized guidelines for creating and managing scientific software registries and repositories.
• Improve research reproducibility and transparency by formalizing policies for software discovery, citation, and preservation.
• Support software contributors and users with clear, publicly available policies on scope, usage, and governance.
• Establish a foundation for trustworthy, sustainable, and community-recognized software repositories and registries.
• Provide a practical, consensus-driven framework applicable across diverse scientific domains and technical infrastructures.

Proposed method

• Synthesized best practices through iterative collaboration among registry and repository managers via monthly calls and a dedicated workshop.
• Derived guidelines from real-world experiences of existing registries and repositories, including those in astronomy, bioinformatics, and earth sciences.
• Formalized nine core policy areas: scope statement, user guidance, contributor guidance, authorship policy, metadata schema sharing, conditions of use, privacy policy, retention policy, and end-of-life policy.
• Integrated input from the FORCE11 Software Citation Implementation Working Group and aligned with broader trustworthiness standards like CoreTrustSeal.
• Provided concrete policy examples and templates from established platforms such as Zenodo, Dryad, and CoMSES Net.
• Emphasized interoperability through standardized metadata schemas (e.g., JSON-LD, CiteAs, Citation File Format) and support for content negotiation.

Experimental results

Research questions

• RQ1 What core policies are essential for ensuring the long-term sustainability and trustworthiness of research software registries and repositories?
• RQ2 How can registries and repositories improve software discoverability and citation practices across diverse scientific disciplines?
• RQ3 What governance and transparency mechanisms are necessary to support contributor and user trust in software repositories?
• RQ4 How should repositories manage data retention, privacy, and end-of-life transitions to ensure continuity and preservation?
• RQ5 What role do standardized metadata schemas and usage policies play in enabling interoperability and reuse of research software?

Key findings

• The nine best practices provide a comprehensive, consensus-driven framework for creating and managing trustworthy research software registries and repositories.
• Public scope statements significantly improve user expectations and reduce confusion about what software is accepted in a given registry or repository.
• Clear authorship and contributor policies enhance attribution and reduce disputes, especially in collaborative software development.
• Sharing metadata schemas—such as those used in Zenodo and Software Heritage—enables interoperability and machine-actionable discovery of software.
• Retention and end-of-life policies, such as those in Dryad and Zenodo, ensure long-term access and continuity of preserved software artifacts.
• Policies on privacy, conditions of use, and data licensing are essential for legal compliance and user trust, particularly in repositories handling sensitive or personal data.