-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 163
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
[ENH] Permit CITATION.cff as structured alternative to some dataset_description fields #1525
Conversation
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
61186d4
to
1dd848a
Compare
Codecov ReportPatch coverage has no change and project coverage change:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1525 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 87.83% 87.68% -0.15%
==========================================
Files 16 14 -2
Lines 1356 1291 -65
==========================================
- Hits 1191 1132 -59
+ Misses 165 159 -6 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
1dd848a
to
186c859
Compare
186c859
to
598a6c0
Compare
LGTM so far |
This looks good so far. |
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.
Thanks @effigies
Closes #901.
Legacy validator PR: https://github.com/bids-standard/bids-validator/pull/1737
The short-term fix for the legacy validator would be addingCITATION.cff
to the file regexes, but I do not currently plan to write code to enforce the mutual exclusion. Unless there's strong feeling that all aspects must be implemented by the legacy validator until we're ready to flip the switch?