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

Remove node indicators from TtT contributors and coordinators #132

Draft
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

unode
Copy link
Collaborator

@unode unode commented Mar 4, 2024

Avoids duplicated records in the contributors page and sorts contributors alphabetically for easier
maintenance.

@unode
Copy link
Collaborator Author

unode commented Mar 4, 2024

The CI failure seems unrelated to my changes. Let me know if this isn't the case.
I used GitPod to test the changes and the build succeeded there.

@mihai-sysbio
Copy link
Collaborator

You're right @unode, that build failure is unrelated. I remember it from the BioHackathon, and where action was re-run and then it would just pass.

@@ -10,9 +10,24 @@ description: |
objective: |
The programme objective is to give instructors tools and tips for providing an enriching learning experience to trainees, irrespective of topic, and to include best-practice guidance on course and training material development.

contributors: [Piv Gopalasingam (EBI), Bruna Piereck (BE), Katarzyna Kamieniecka (UK), Krzysztof Poterlowicz (UK), Helena Schnitzer (DE), Lisanna Paladin (DE), Jessica Lindvall (SE), Piv Gopalasingam (EBI), Erin Calhoun (NO), Roland Krause (LU), Katharina Heil (Hub), Daniel Wibberg (DE), Renato Alves (DE)]
contributors:
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I see there was some ELIXIR Node contribution captured previously, was that removed intentionally?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We indeed have contributors as section for the resources. So, I'd keep it.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The presence of the node information is what caused names be duplicated here (see for instance my name and anyone else listed under contributors).

If the node information should be kept, then a different logic must be used in the contributors page to ensure names aren't repeated. At the time this PR was done, it seemed easier to remove the node information than to add it to the other source of contributors.

The contributors list wasn't removed but was instead converted to multi-line list and sorted alphabetically. This makes it more git-friendly and easier to maintain.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Related, I just noticed that the PR will still not address all cases.
For instance, Krzystof is currently present three times:

KP - Krzys Poterlowicz
KP - Krzystof Poterlowicz
KP( - Krzysztof Poterlowicz (UK)

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We might need to centralize the information of each person so that they can appear in more than one resource. Need to check how this has been implemented elsewhere.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

PR will still not address all cases

The way I understood the PR was that it's limited to TtT pages. Removing all duplicates is a great idea though.

how this has been implemented elsewhere.

I guess duplicates are merged as long as everyone is listed in the exact same way across all pages.

As a different issue, perhaps one could implement a different way of enriching the personal info (picture, Node, orcid, github id, link to personal profile) without it having to be repeated in the contributors pages.

@unode unode force-pushed the avoid-duplicate-contributors branch from 02b09c7 to bca8fc1 Compare March 17, 2024 18:45
@unode
Copy link
Collaborator Author

unode commented Mar 17, 2024

Hi everyone,

A few additional aspects contributed to the duplicated records so the proposed fix turned out to be a little more complicated than initially expected.

The solution I'm proposing here is to:

  1. Keep affiliation, node information, contact and more in the CONTRIBUTORS.yml file.
  2. Include a node attribute in the CONTRIBUTORS file that contains the node that was originally in parenthesis. This will be added as an extension to the lesson template and will be displayed in the future. The affiliation field also needs to be provided for it to be shown.
  3. All contributors were added as "authors". Let me know if this incorrect and a distinction is intended here.

This PR also includes a fix to the contact information. Previously used a mail attribute that isn't used. The correct attribute should have been email.

Once upstream is merged, node information will be displayed as shown in the screenshot below:

screenshot_2024-03-17_21-36-07_835345180

Copy link
Collaborator

@mihai-sysbio mihai-sysbio left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fantastic work @unode!

_data/CONTRIBUTORS.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Mihail Anton <[email protected]>
@unode unode marked this pull request as draft March 18, 2024 10:23
@unode
Copy link
Collaborator Author

unode commented Mar 18, 2024

Converting to Draft until ELIXIR-Belgium/elixir-toolkit-theme#230 is merged.
Some changes there will likely impact the current PR.

@elinkronander elinkronander marked this pull request as ready for review December 12, 2024 13:14
@elinkronander elinkronander marked this pull request as draft December 12, 2024 13:15
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