DOC: Correct and update BibTex entry for PyGMT Paper in README#4727
Conversation
|
sorry for the mistake. I feel it worth a patch release 0.19.1 |
| volume = {27}, | ||
| pages = {e2019GC008515}, | ||
| doi = {10.1029/2019GC008515}, | ||
| number = {7}, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you please also add the issue number to CITATION.cff?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done in commit 05d48b0. Following https://github.com/citation-file-format/citation-file-format/blob/main/schema-guide.md#definitionsreference the field name is here issue not number.
Maybe we can wait a few days after doing the announcement on the forum in case users report any critical bugs and then decide if we do a minor release or only a patch. The cff file and the changelog are correct (only the issue is missing as we did not know it at that time). I agree that as the BibTex entry is also shown on the PyGMT website and v0.19.0 is currently the latest release, this is not optimal. But we still mention v0.19.0 as the releated release in the publication; from this perspective only a path makes sense. However, I have actually no experience with how widely such BibTex entries are directly copied from websites. I typed all the references manually for my manuscripts. And for my dissertation, I used JefRef, where you can add the DOI-URL to the publication (which I copied directly from the publication website oder paper PDF), and it's downloading the remaining citation information (it's not always perfect but quite good). |
Description of proposed changes
Correct BibTex entry for PyGMT Paper in README, not the DOI from the GMT 6 paper. The changelog is correct.
Pathes #4713
Preview: https://github.com/GenericMappingTools/pygmt/tree/add-paper-issue-to-citiation#citing-pygmt
Guidelines
Slash Commands
You can write slash commands (
/command) in the first line of a comment to performspecific operations. Supported slash command is:
/format: automatically format and lint the code