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

Dev #101

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 9, 2025
Merged

Dev #101

merged 3 commits into from
Feb 9, 2025

Conversation

ypriverol
Copy link
Member

@ypriverol ypriverol commented Feb 9, 2025

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Added a citation metadata resource that supplies comprehensive details—including release date, DOI, journal, and publisher—to guide proper referencing of the package.
  • Documentation

    • Updated the citation section in the documentation to feature the new publication and reorganized additional references for improved clarity.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Feb 9, 2025

Walkthrough

This pull request adds a new CITATION.cff file that contains detailed metadata for the ibaqpy package, including citation instructions, publication details, authors, and an abstract. Additionally, the citation section in README.md has been updated to showcase the new publication citation for ibaqpy and to relocate the previous citation under a separate "Other relevant publications" section. These modifications purely update the documentation and citation information without affecting package functionality.

Changes

File(s) Change Summary
CITATION.cff New file added with metadata for ibaqpy: includes cff-version, message, title, detailed author list, abstract, date-released, DOI, URL, journal, publisher, and version.
README.md Citation section updated: replaced the old citation with a new Zheng et al. (2025) reference and moved the previous Wang et al. (2023) citation to an "Other relevant publications" section; formatting adjusted to block quote style.

Poem

I'm a little rabbit, leaping with cheer,
A new CITATION.cff now appears so clear.
Metadata and citations in tidy display,
README refined in its scholarly way.
With swift hops, I celebrate these changes anew,
Bounding in code with a heart light and true!


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Feb 9, 2025

Qodana for JVM

It seems all right 👌

No new problems were found according to the checks applied

☁️ View the detailed Qodana report

Contact Qodana team

Contact us at [email protected]

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
README.md (1)

226-226: Format the DOI as a clickable link.

The DOI should be formatted as a clickable link for better accessibility.

-bioRxiv 2025.02.08.637208; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.02.08.637208
+bioRxiv 2025.02.08.637208; doi: [10.1101/2025.02.08.637208](https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.02.08.637208)
🧰 Tools
🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.17.2)

226-226: Bare URL used
null

(MD034, no-bare-urls)

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d7b76a9 and 73acd40.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • CITATION.cff (1 hunks)
  • README.md (1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.17.2)
README.md

226-226: Bare URL used
null

(MD034, no-bare-urls)

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (3)
  • GitHub Check: Codacy Static Code Analysis
  • GitHub Check: build
  • GitHub Check: build
🔇 Additional comments (3)
CITATION.cff (2)

1-29: LGTM! The citation metadata is well-structured.

The CITATION.cff file follows the CFF format specification and includes all necessary metadata:

  • Version and message
  • Title and authors
  • Abstract
  • Publication details (DOI, URL, journal)
  • Release information

24-26: Verify the release date and URL.

The release date and URL contain future dates (2025). Since we're in February 2025, this is acceptable, but please ensure:

  1. The release date matches the actual publication date
  2. The bioRxiv URL is accessible and contains the correct paper
✅ Verification successful

🏁 Script executed:

#!/bin/bash
# Verify the bioRxiv URL is accessible
curl -I "https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2025/02/08/2025.02.08.637208"

Length of output: 1256


Release date and URL verified as valid.

  • The release date ("2025-02-08") is appropriate for the current period.
  • The bioRxiv URL is accessible; the HTTP 301 redirect to the versioned URL confirms proper protocol handling.
README.md (1)

224-230: LGTM! Citation information is consistent with CITATION.cff.

The citation section is well-organized with:

  • Primary citation matching CITATION.cff
  • Previous citation properly moved to "Other relevant publications"
🧰 Tools
🪛 markdownlint-cli2 (0.17.2)

226-226: Bare URL used
null

(MD034, no-bare-urls)

@ypriverol ypriverol merged commit 4599840 into master Feb 9, 2025
13 checks passed
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.

1 participant