-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 285
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
Add support for CITATION.cff format #1987
Conversation
* Initial test adding cff * Add dummy CFF file * Add citation * Minor typo in display message * Generate documentation --------- Co-authored-by: Carlos Martinez <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Pablo Rodríguez Sánchez <[email protected]>
Some contextCitation File Format (CFF) files are plain text files containing citation info in both a machine- and human-readable manner. This format is endorsed, among others, by:
All contextWant to know even more? Please visit the Citation File Format website. |
An R package on which the proposed
Are there existing R packages that actually use this? As the message above says, there's already a strong R convention for using If the |
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ | |||
#' Create Citation File Format | |||
#' | |||
#' `use_cff()` ... |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This needs to be fleshed out.
Unfortunately, it looks like the CFF file needs to be on the root directory: |
You can use |
But if we |
I went to one of the links above and found interesting info about "Other citation files": GitHub already looks for the I'm starting to think that CITATION.cff may not be compelling for R packages, given our pre-existing facilities for this. |
If Maybe a more useful thing to do would be to document this is the preferred way to cite software written in R (for example in The Turing Way section on software citation). And perhaps it is worth checking it is possible to convert one format into the other (with cffconvert?) if for whatever reason someone preferred to use CFF format? |
Yeah I think the case for CITATION.cff for packages is hard to make as it stands, since it's basically competing with an existing standard that is supported by both the base language ( So I think you make good points about the Turing Way guide and raising awareness of cffconvert, but I don't see a clear action item for usethis itself at this time. |
Dear @jennybc, @c-martinez asked me to provide some answers to your questions. TL;DR
DetailsLooking at the whole conversation, I feel there is some misunderstanding. It is not our purpose to replace nor compete against R's This is why As far as I know GitHub didn't implement this for Why is this important?Enabling a user-friendly interface for citing code in the world's largest code repository is a huge step toward recognizing research software. We know R, RStudio, and Posit also believe in this mission. Answers to specific questions
Action pointsWe kindly ask you to reconsider reopening this pull request. We are open to highlight the priority of
And of course, to address any other required edition. Thank you for your time and consideration! |
This PR addresses #1469
I am not very experienced with R, but am a big supporter of CITATION.cff and encourage its adoption at every opportunity, so this looked like a good opportunity to contribute. I've asked a colleague (@PabRod) to review my code before sending this PR.
I don't think this is perfect, but I think it works and am happy to improve it as necessary.