Adds a a new file CITATION.cff #5721
Conversation
CITATION.cff
Outdated
| ASPECT is a code to simulate convection and tectonic | ||
| processes in Earth and other planetary bodies. It has | ||
| grown from a pure mantle-convection code into a tool for | ||
| many geodynamic applications including applications for | ||
| inner core convection, lithospheric scale deformation, | ||
| two-phase flow, and numerical methods development. The | ||
| project is supported by CIG (https://geodynamics.org). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe it's worth spelling out what ASPECT stands for? I don't like documenting history, I generally like it better if we document the current state. So I would rewrite the "It has grown from..." part. I feel not very strongly about this here, though.
What do others think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good point. I modified this. Additional wordsmithing welcome.
| - type: doi | ||
| value: 10.5281/zenodo.592692 | ||
| description: concept DOI | ||
| - type: doi | ||
| value: 10.5281/zenodo.8200213 | ||
| description: version 2.5.0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't quite understand the purpose of this section. What is "concept DOI"? Both DOIs link to ASPECT 2.5.0 on Zenodo, right? What's with this description: shouldn't that be the name of the article (ASPECT 2.5.0)? Does this prefill anything on zenodo when we make a new release?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A concept doi is a link to the project (the concept of the idea if that makes any sense) as a whole and not to a specific version.
We use the Zenodo webhook. Can you delete the zenodo.json file as well? (this assumes it is already supported by zenodo) |
|
If this file contains the version number of the latest release and the DOI, how can one make a software release, generate a Zenodo DOI automatically that does not contain outdated information in this file? (the old json file does not contain the version number, just a list of people) |
|
@tjhei However this may not be the functionality we seek. The current drop down points to the webpage. In addition, if you have a .zenodo.json file in your repo, the .json file will override the .cff file. See the FAQa under GItHub: https://help.zenodo.org/faq/ Conclusion is that probably this is premature. It will allow the project to be scraped but will impact how the citation is displayed in the repo. Perhaps it is better to wait for the codemeta.json integration which my source confirms it has not made it into production. I did not get an estimated timeline and this does not show up on their roadmap unless it is a small piece of a larger project e.g. EU Open Research Repository. Shrug |
Co-authored-by: Timo Heister <[email protected]>
|
Independent of the question of whether this particular file is useful, my suggestion would be to use the list of principal developers, not maintainers. The former is more inclusive and in particular gives @cedrict credit for the many cookbooks he has written over the years. |
The use of CITATION.cff files is becoming more widely accepted. It is supported by GItHub, Zenodo and Zotero. In addition, projects that do metadata analysis on software often scrape open repositories for this information. I am recommending we include this file so it can be included in such studies.
Zenodo will in the near future transition to CITATION.cff away from .zenodo.json. The .cff file should be considered a substitute and the .json file deleted.
CAUTION:
Named principle developers should review their personal information in this file.
For more information, see: https://citation-file-format.github.io/
Thoughts?