-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
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 REVIEW] Suggestions for Documentation #5
Comments
Furthermore, considering that Apple Silicon (actions/runner-images#8439) is available in GitHub Actions now, it would be beneficial for the authors to include builds for OSX arm64 in the ci.yml. This addition would aid in verifying the effectiveness of the installation instructions for OSX arm64. |
Thanks @xin-huang for your input, I'm traveling for a conference this week but I'll get on with addressing all of these next week! |
@tkchafin Feel free to use FlyCI's M1 and M2 runners. Our runners are on average 2x faster and 2x cheaper than GitHub's AND we have a free tier for OSS projects (see below). Install Instructions
jobs:
ci:
- runs-on: macos-latest
+ runs-on: flyci-macos-large-latest-m1
steps:
- name: 👀 Checkout repo
uses: actions/checkout@v4 500 mins/month Free for Public ReposSince your repo is public, FlyCI offers 500 mins/month of free M1 runner usage with the Don't hеsitate to contact us in case the free tier doesn't suit your needs or you experience any issues with the runners. Our team is here to support you! Best Regards, |
Thanks @xin-huang, I've fixed all of these now. I sent a pull request with a fix for the warning coming from pymantel which has now been merged, so that one will clear once the conda installation has been updated to the newest release. The other warnings can be ignored (in the context of the unit tests!) so I have suppressed them. |
Hello @tkchafin Thank you for the update. With the current version in this repository, I can proceed with the example analysis. However, when I used the command listed in the README to install
I still got the same error: To resolve this, I had to explicitly specify the version with the following command:
This suggests that the conda channel might need an update to automatically provide the latest version to users. Besides, I observed that the version on the conda channel is Line 5 in 3faf71c
It might be beneficial to synchronize the version in |
Versioning issues should be fixed now |
yes, it works now, thanks |
This is a part of the JOSS review (openjournals/joss-reviews#6160)
The opening section of the README seems inadequate for a comprehensive statement of need.
autostreamtree/README.md
Lines 3 to 7 in e86d8af
I recommend that the authors enhance it by incorporating the statement of need from their paper. An introduction section specifically tailored for the statement of need in the README would be beneficial.
There appears to be a redundancy in the installation instructions. The content found here:
autostreamtree/README.md
Lines 53 to 60 in e86d8af
is repeated later:
autostreamtree/README.md
Lines 78 to 85 in e86d8af
I suggest removing the first instance to avoid duplication.
Regarding ARM Mac installations, I am unable to test them personally. However, I noticed the commands for
mamba
installation:autostreamtree/README.md
Lines 125 to 128 in e86d8af
According to the latest guidelines, installing
mamba
viaconda
is not recommended and should only be installed in thebase
environment.Additionally,
mamba
now supports ARM64, so updating the installation instructions formamba
would be appropriate.When attempting the example analysis with this command:
autostreamtree/README.md
Line 380 in e86d8af
I encountered the following error:
This issue may need to be addressed for successful example replication.
I was unable to locate any API documentation. It's important for the authors to add this as it is a requirement of the journal.
Running
pytest
resulted in several warningsAddressing these warnings could enhance the software's reliability.
Additionally, I recommend integrating code coverage reporting with a service like
codecov
. This would provide a clearer understanding of the extent to which the unit tests cover the codebase.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: