  Research artifact sharing is known to strengthen the transparency of
scientific studies. However, in the lack of common discipline-specific
guidelines for artifacts evaluation, subjective and conflicting expectations
may happen and threaten artifact quality. In this paper, we discuss our
preliminary ideas for a framework based on quality management principles (5W2H)
that can aid in the establishment of common guidelines for artifact evaluation
and sharing. Also, using the Analytic Hierarchy Process, we discuss how
research communities could join efforts to aid the guidelines' adequacy to
research priorities. These combined methodologies constitute a novelty for
software engineering research which can foster research software
sustainability.
