Do you have any plans to incorporate Apertus into Lumo?
actu.epfl.ch/news/apertus...

I am also curious why journals are not included. Especially in SE (and maybe also more in Europe than the US), people started publishing more in journals with the JF option at ICSE, FSE, etc

I wonder how this index would change if you work at the intersection of multiple fields. I can only guess that it would increase the index

Hier gibt es auch eine sehr umfangreiche Liste von europäischen Anbietern.
european-alternatives.eu

@acm-tosem.bsky.social

This is the correct arXiv link: doi.org/10.48550/arX...

Here is the arXiv version: doi.org/10.1109/TSE....
And here the TSE version: doi.org/10.1109/TSE....

Very cool. I have been thinking about the energy impact of testing for a while. While not energy but performance, we had a TSE paper a while ago where we considered performance indicators when generating EvoSuite tests. This might be of interest to you as well

I get the all in one place argument. Hopefully the one place is always kept up to date.

That sounds like a great idea, if you have the stamina to keep it up to date. That is, I would say, the beauty of dblp/Google Scholar that you do not (necessarily) have to put in effort. My impression is that personal websites are often slightly outdated or contain broken links.

Isn't that what @orcid.org is now for?

1 and 2 is not really an issue for me: we put a preprint on arXiv, and it gets indexed by dblp and Google Scholar

I understand that for contact details. But for publications, why is DBLP, Google Scholar, or @orcid.bsky.social not sufficient? I feel like we keep maintaining way too many publication lists

Same here. In all fairness, the collaboration tools (comments and change tracking) are great

Where have the great days gone when we had papers on GH and used local editors?