-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add project metadata json #63
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I checked the names and the ORCIDs those are okay
codemeta.json
Outdated
], | ||
"identifier": "https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.883594", | ||
"codeRepository": "https://github.com/chloroExtractorTeam/chloroExtractor", | ||
"datePublished": "2017-09-26", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we need to update the dates or will that be done by JOSS?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think this will be automatically updated. I guess we have to do this ourselves. Maybe we can re-run the generation script...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thats okay for me, but in that case I would postpone the pull request until we will submit as last or last before last commit. Or you adjust the dates for tomorrow, as we want to submit it tomorrow.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You are right we should probably wait.
We have another chicken-or-egg problem: We want to have the doi for version 1.0.0 in this file but we do not have this doi until we release version 1.0.0 ;-)
It is probably best to use the general concept doi of zenodo then: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.883594
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Won't be the optimal but a good and solid solution or do we get an DOI for draft releases?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Another possibility is, deactivation of automated zenodo service, reserving a DOI at zenodo, and making the release and preparing a ZIP-File of that release (does the release tars/zips now include recursive checkouts?) and publish that on our own upload with the reserved DOI. In that case we know the DOI before making the release.
What is with other emails? Should be ask the coauthors if they want to include their email addresses? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
- Additional author email addresses need a decision
- Dates are updated by us or JOSS?
The emails in the codemeta file are optional. Of course, everyone who wants to can add their address there. Won't hurt to let them know. |
In that case I will write another email to our group of authors and will ask, if someone want his/her email added to the meta file |
81c7429
to
1dfb62a
Compare
Generated with https://gist.github.com/arfon/478b2ed49e11f984d6fb and manually adjusted. Fix #5
e1a6304
to
17461c6
Compare
2954233
to
d7eb745
Compare
9a47d46
to
31b495f
Compare
31b495f
to
a22b8af
Compare
Generated with https://gist.github.com/arfon/478b2ed49e11f984d6fb
and manually adjusted.
Fix #5