Skip to content
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 citation info #322

Merged
merged 4 commits into from Sep 9, 2023
Merged

Add citation info #322

merged 4 commits into from Sep 9, 2023

Conversation

lan496
Copy link
Member

@lan496 lan496 commented Sep 6, 2023

This PR adds citation information in README.md . Because the synchronization between README.md and index.md will be addressed in #257, this PR just touches README.md.

@lan496 lan496 requested a review from atztogo September 6, 2023 11:34
@LecrisUT
Copy link
Collaborator

LecrisUT commented Sep 6, 2023

Can you put that in CITATION.cff and link the README.md to that? It will create a button to more easily add the citation.

I don't know if it will work with multiple citations so let me know.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Sep 6, 2023

Codecov Report

Patch and project coverage have no change.

Comparison is base (6f45a2b) 83.60% compared to head (9175126) 83.60%.
Report is 7 commits behind head on develop.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop     #322   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    83.60%   83.60%           
========================================
  Files           23       23           
  Lines         7942     7942           
========================================
  Hits          6640     6640           
  Misses        1302     1302           
Flag Coverage Δ
c_api 76.10% <ø> (ø)
fortran_api 36.82% <ø> (ø)
python_api 80.42% <ø> (ø)
unit_tests 1.24% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@lan496
Copy link
Member Author

lan496 commented Sep 6, 2023

Multiple citations do not seem to be supported: citation-file-format/citation-file-format#339

@LecrisUT
Copy link
Collaborator

LecrisUT commented Sep 6, 2023

😞 Ok, we'll just have to keep Citation.cff up to date for the latest version and add any other ones in a relevant location.

CITATION.cff Outdated
Comment on lines 14 to 16
identifiers:
- type: doi
value: 10.48550/arXiv.1808.01590
Copy link
Collaborator

@LecrisUT LecrisUT Sep 6, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The generated Bibtex does not seem to pull in this info:
https://github.com/lan496/spglib/tree/how-to-cite

@software{
Togo_texttt_Spglib_a_software,
author = {Togo, Atsushi and Tanaka, Isao},
title = {{$\texttt{Spglib}$: a software library for crystal symmetry search}},
url = {https://github.com/spglib/spglib}
}

Specifically the doi is not there. Maybe you can change it to cite the article specifically instead of software

@lan496
Copy link
Member Author

lan496 commented Sep 6, 2023

Now, doi appears.

@misc{Togo_texttt_Spglib_a_software,
author = {Togo, Atsushi and Tanaka, Isao},
doi = {10.48550/arXiv.1808.01590},
title = {{$\texttt{Spglib}$: a software library for crystal symmetry search}},
url = {https://github.com/spglib/spglib}
}

@LecrisUT
Copy link
Collaborator

LecrisUT commented Sep 7, 2023

How does it look when you try preferred-citation and refeerences?

@lan496
Copy link
Member Author

lan496 commented Sep 7, 2023

references looks to refer to others' works. So, I think it does not suit the purpose.
https://github.com/citation-file-format/citation-file-format/blob/main/schema-guide.md#references
Actually, although I realize it is a practice to include CITATION.cff, I do not see its benefit for scientific OSS so much 😕

@LecrisUT
Copy link
Collaborator

LecrisUT commented Sep 7, 2023

It's mostly a convenience tool for the users to get the recommended citation. There are metadata that can be scrapped from dependencies, but it is mostly helpful to get the most recent paper about the scientific details.

@lan496
Copy link
Member Author

lan496 commented Sep 8, 2023

@LecrisUT I wonder why CITATION.cff does not assume a repository may have several papers to be cited...

@atztogo To be sure, can you check this PR? I'll write a release note for v2.1.0 after this PR is merged.

@LecrisUT
Copy link
Collaborator

LecrisUT commented Sep 8, 2023

I think because papers are not a good representation of the software than can change throughout the process, while a link to the repository is always representative. My understanding of references field is that it gives additional references for the repo code, and contrary to the upstream documentation, I think it is more intuitive to add the relevant citations there.

@lan496 lan496 self-assigned this Sep 8, 2023
@lan496
Copy link
Member Author

lan496 commented Sep 8, 2023

Thank you for your comment. Come to think of it, references may be a place to give additional publications for the repository.
I tried to include the references section, but it does not seem to show the section in GitHub.

@lan496
Copy link
Member Author

lan496 commented Sep 8, 2023

Then, I think it is beneficial to write preferred-citation in CITATION.cff but other references in CITATION.cff will not be consulted because YAML format is not common to refer to a publication.

@LecrisUT
Copy link
Collaborator

LecrisUT commented Sep 8, 2023

Hmm, thanks for checking. I think we should just let it cite only one paper or the software itself. The issue with citing the software is that I am not sure if it is picked up by the citation crawlers like "Semantic Scholar". I would leave it to you guys to decide if it should track and cite the most recent paper or the original one.

@lan496
Copy link
Member Author

lan496 commented Sep 9, 2023

An identical doi for spglib software (by for example zenado) may be more appropriate for metadata purposes.

@LecrisUT
Copy link
Collaborator

LecrisUT commented Sep 9, 2023

I have been reading about the github actions around it and I find it fascinating. Best one I've seen so far is:
https://github.com/kykrueger/zenodo-publish with https://github.com/kykrueger/zenodo-new-version.

A workflow I am considering is:

  • on major or minor tag, publish (the current draft) to zenodo (with the reserved doi)
  • after release create a new zenodo draft, reserve a doi and replace it in CITATION.cff (think of it as pointing to develop until a major/minor tag is pushed)

I think we can do the same with CHANGELOG.md where we mark the top one as Current Version and after a release we date it with the tag name and version, clearing the Current Version section.

@atztogo
Copy link
Collaborator

atztogo commented Sep 9, 2023

Thanks @lan496. README.md looks good to me.

@lan496 lan496 merged commit e0e5c54 into spglib:develop Sep 9, 2023
51 checks passed
@lan496 lan496 deleted the how-to-cite branch September 9, 2023 11:56
@lan496
Copy link
Member Author

lan496 commented Sep 9, 2023

@LecrisUT the workflow for CHANGELOG.md looks too exaggerated for me, but let's open another issue for zenodo.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants