metadata: add Zenodo, tidy badges and keywords #3373
Conversation
casperdcl
added
enhancement
| "data-science", "data-version-control", "machine-learning", "git", | ||
| "developer-tools", "reproducibility", "collaboration", "ai", "python"], | ||
| "contributors": [ | ||
| {"name": "DVC team", "type": "Other", "affiliation": "Iterative"}] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure if we want name: "DVC team" or name: "Iterative" or name: "iterative.ai" or something else... Same with "affilitation".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
are there example from Google or other companies? what usually people do? :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
fyi affiliation can be blank and will show up when name is hovered over.
name should really match whatever we choose for the citation text (i.e. think of it as an "author" field)
| Iterative, *DVC: Data Version Control - Git for Data & Models* (2020) | ||
| `DOI:10.5281/zenodo.012345 <https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3677553>`_. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Again, not sure about capitalisation and exact wording
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you can write, Iterative, *Data Version Control (DVC)*. No need to say "Git for Data & Models"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
let's discuss this with @dmpetrov ... we need to get it right.
- do we need to mention org at all? Iterative?
- do we optimize for certain keywords. I would say "Git for Data" is important for us, even though Data Version Control is even more important.
but may be you are right, @andronovhopf and we should go with a clean and nice, simple version 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think it's terribly important to optimize for keywords in this context since Zenodo doesn't look built for discovering new projects; just tagging the repo with a DOI. not sure though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think @shcheklein was referring to keywords (buzzwords) to use in our recommended citation
|
@casperdcl is it expected? it looks too long? can we do two lines, for example? |
Silly oversight on my part; fixed now. |
|
Er @efiop I think this was still under review |
|
@casperdcl Oh, sorry, is anything wrong in this PR? It got 2 approvals so I've merged it 🤔 EDIT: ok, I'm blind. Now I do see the comments. Well, if there will be any requested changes, let's just address them on top, I don't think there is any harm done here. |
4 participants
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.