Skip to content
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

WIP: adds superdataset metadata in studyminimeta.yaml #61

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

jsheunis
Copy link

This adds a .studyminimeta.yaml file with some basic metadata for the SF superdataset.

The impetus behind this is to be able to render a pretty catalog, without missing data, from the SF super and subdatasets.

TODO:

  • Author list (for dataset): confirm whether it should be only Michael, or all github repo contributors, or all contributors to super and subdatasets?
  • Check/edit description
  • Decide which publications to add/replace (the whole list from https://www.studyforrest.org/publications.html seems a bit extensive?)
  • Add correct email addresses for authors (for the catalog, this is not required and won't be displayed; is this required or even discouraged otherwise?)

Comments by @mih @adswa @loj et al welcome.

@jsheunis
Copy link
Author

Wait, I used datalad save to add the file, should I just have committed it to git directly?

@adswa
Copy link
Contributor

adswa commented Apr 15, 2022

Wait, I used datalad save to add the file, should I just have committed it to git directly?

Yep, to Git would make it actually reviewable :) This should get it into Git.

@yarikoptic
Copy link

ping on this PR -- would be great to see it finalized/merged to get a complete dataset for the https://datalad.github.io/datalad-catalog/ demo.

Copy link
Contributor

@adswa adswa left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

from a cursory read this looks ok to me


# person information, one record for every email-key used above
person:
[email protected]:

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Since it would be a great example to follow, I decided to ask a clarification question: why did you side for the meaningless a, b, c, d which might generally result in a confusion and misattribution (mixing up one person ID over another) in favor over some

  • clearly not a valid email
  • including the actual name
Suggested change
[email protected]:
person-ayan-sengupta:

or even just

Suggested change
[email protected]:
ayan-sengupta:

or alike?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants