Double blind peer review when paper cites author's GitHub repo for code

Censor out the repo's name, and provide code to the referees as an auxiliary file.

• Make a copy of the repository available at an anonymous URL, e.g., using Google Drive with a fresh account.

• Submit a copy of the repository with your manuscript (if permitted by the journal), alternatively, send the repository to the editor by email.

I'm literally in the same situation as you right now, and came across this repository/service on GitHub a few days ago:. Since your code and names are already public, it only provides a basic level of obfuscation. However, as long as reviewers are being honest and not actively trying to find out the names of the authors, then it should keep them from accidentally discovering who you are.

Beyond that, the most effective approach is not releasing it publicly until after review, and instead providing the code/documentation/whatever privately through the journal. My concern with this approach is that it depends on removing any name association from the material. So what happens if a reviewer rejects the manuscript, then publishes the code or parts of it as their own before you? The lack of a public record on your part could make it a bit of a headache to resolve.

Ultimately, there's not much you can do about reviewers that intentionally try to circumvent the anonymity. Even without your name anywhere, if you've published before, someone could potentially still get a pretty good idea of who you are through the content and patterns in the manuscript itself.