Skip to main content


Here's a question for #academia: why shouldn't I count my contributions to major open-source projects which are scientifically relevant (e.g. Linux [1], OpenCV [2]) just like publications?

- They have a unique identifier.
- They are most certainly peer-reviewed (if you don't believe me, try to submit a Linux patch sometime)
- They are archived long-term.
- They are publicly available.

So... where's the difference?

[1] https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/drivers/input/touchscreen/sur40.c
[2] https://github.com/opencv/opencv/pull/10081

in reply to Florian 'floe' Echtler

I see no reason why you could not, though perhaps under a different subsection heading similar to what is recommended for reviews vs original research.

Lo, thar be cookies on this site to keep track of your login. By clicking 'okay', you are CONSENTING to this.