-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
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
JOSS #45
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #45 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 81.57% 81.57%
=======================================
Files 6 6
Lines 2008 2008
=======================================
Hits 1638 1638
Misses 370 370 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
e650159
to
cea16fa
Compare
A note to myself. I forgot to cite the GSW-Fortran! |
It seems like it was the only implementation with a doi missing. It might be worth figure out how to cite the other implementation, even if those other ones don't have a doi or any proper citation descriptor.
Type techreport might be more adequate. Other minor fixes.
Thanks to @efiring.
@efiring, thanks for the note. Is it bette now? The point behind is that with `features='compat'` we guarantee compatibility with GSW-m. While GSW-C has some minor differences.
Somehow JOSS processing assumes that a bib reference type manual should be from a software and adds '[Computer software]' to the refence. Let's see if a techreport resolves that.
Playing with bib file.
Back to pages 1--28 instead of 28pp
It's up to JOSS references style to decide showing it or not.
Perfect! Clear message. Thanks @efiring!
For the software without DOI, reference type 'manual' might be better than 'article'.
a121331
to
374c34d
Compare
First draft