-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
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
Review info in codemeta.json #49
Comments
I think it's okay to include them. |
I think this could be a checklist item so that we have consent. For editors it would be easy since there are only 4 of us. |
Ok so the digested open table would take that into account. And for past reviews, would we try and contact former reviewers or just not include them? |
I sort of think its fine to include them without asking. For DESCRIPTION files, there's a little more implication by including people in the |
Cool, now I just need to think of how/where to make the digested table Review number, Reviewers, Editor available for everyone. |
To be generated from the Airtable to a public csv
Currently the review deduced from an rOpenSci peer-review badge includes only provider and URLs, cf https://github.com/ropensci/codemetar/blob/387456e9d62fdb9be936a089d7173e8d21d783b8/codemeta.json#L451 but with such info it'll include "editor" and "author" (= reviewers), each person will have a name and URL (GitHub profile). |
@karthik could you start by making the information you use for the badges available as an API? So that I could query it with an issue number, and it'd return me the status (instead of my asking GitHub API). In the packages/ page I'd like to be able to assign the right badge color without using a badge. |
Sure, let me work on that |
A csv dump would be just fine, I'd memoise it |
Sure, I can also do a json dump if that's easier |
as you prefer |
@karthik in https://badges.ropensci.org/json/onboarded.json the entry 127 lacks a pkgname. It's |
@ropensci/editors
For onboarded packages codemeta.json will include review metadata, a minima review URL + rOpenSci as provider.
Now in ropensci/codemetar#23 (comment) @cboettig says "it would be natural to include the review author & editor here too". Technically we could get this information from GitHub (and even have a pre-digested table somewhere on GitHub, not only the private Airtable) but do we want to have reviewers and editor(s) listed in codemeta.json given that we ask reviewers for authorization before including them in DESCRIPTION?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: