Skip to content

pyopensci #140

@tschm

Description

@tschm

by @phschiele:

On another note, I know that we already have venue for the paper.

For the cvxmarkowitz package, I wanted to mention again the pyOpenSci project.

The benefits in my view would be:

  • They review the code base itself, unlike a journal.

  • The reviews make sure the we follow best practices for a scientific Python package. I think this would be a valuable experience for all of us.

  • Having this "seal of approval" would make our package stand out, and having a robust Markowitz implementation (in the mathematical and software engineering sense) will certainly be valuable for many users.

  • In addition, we can describe the package in a few pages and would get a JOSS publication for that, as pyOpenSci has a partnership with them.

Of course we have other options, but I think it could be a good fit!

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions