need a better review process for using github

[timm]

some suggestions:

https://github.com/ds4se/admin/blob/master/lessons.md

[tzimmermsr]

Here are some of my suggestions so far:

• It was hard to keep track of all the submissions (neither find -name *md or manual worked well). How to fix it: Have the authors create an issue report for each submission. That way they will be auto subscribed to any discussion on that issue. The issue report simply contains a link to the paper. Then assign one author to the issue report.
• The spreadsheet with the assignments worked well. To improve, add direct links to the issue reports and/or chapter. Make it explicit that people have to comment on existing issue reports, not create new one. (e.g., by using the direct links, and/or by using a sticky issue report that always shows at the top of the issue page)
• For editors create a spreadsheet with all the author info and links to the chapter and the spreadsheet
• The review forms worked well but could be simplified (some field were rarely used). Most important: short summary, things that should be changes, things that should not be changed.
• If people don't used GitHub the editor creates the initial issue report (and is assigned to it).

[timm]

All good ideas.

Assume open review, we could run a whole journal this way.