search

MDAnalysis / scipy_proceedings

SciPy conference proceedings: MDAnalysis paper
Other
0 stars 4 forks source link

draft amendments #34

Closed orbeckst closed 8 years ago

orbeckst commented 8 years ago

@MDAnalysis/scipy2016 : The draft was submitted (PR scipy-conference/scipy_proceedings#212) but we can still amend the paper (and I have already done this extensively). You may continue submitting PRs inside this repository against the 2016 branch. Please have a quick look and if you want to change anything, please submit a PR or leave a note here.

If you just want to say "all ok" please do that – good to have explicit agreement, too.

To keep things orderly, I'll do the merges — just assign each PR to @orbeckst.

In order to keep the submission clean, I removed all unnecessary files. However, I am keeping the with-PDF branch around. As described on the wiki under Makefile on branch with-PDF, this branch is periodically rebased against 2016 and the PDF MDAnalysis_SciPy_2016.pdf is committed:

git checkout with-PDF
git rebase 2016
make
git add MDAnalysis_SciPy_2016.pdf
git commit --amend -C HEAD   # the top commit is "rebuilt PDF"
git push -f origin with-PDF

Thus, you should always be able to browse the latest PDF of the draft at MDAnalysis_SciPy_2016.pdf.

seb-buch commented 8 years ago

All OK for me. The paper underlines very well the "swiss army knife on steroids" aspect of MDAnalysis and presents all the recent performance enhancements. I take my hat off to all the contributors!

thumb up

mnmelo commented 8 years ago

Awesome work, everyone!

I've found higher resolution versions of the netCDF and NumPy logos, and I think they'll make Fig 1 cleaner. (The biopython logo also needs minor position adjustments). PR soon. I'm also not sure that the hierarchy is well depicted in Fig 1. Should we discuss this in a separate issue? (Does it matter?)

orbeckst commented 8 years ago

PR & suggestions welcome!

On 2 Jun, 2016, at 10:09, mnmelo notifications@github.com wrote:

Awesome work, everyone!

I've found higher resolution versions of the netCDF and NumPy logos, and I think they'll make Fig 1 cleaner. (The biopython logo also needs minor position adjustments). PR soon. I'm also not sure that the hierarchy is well depicted in Fig 1. Should we discuss this in a separate issue? (Does it matter?)

— You are receiving this because you were assigned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

Oliver Beckstein * orbeckst@gmx.net skype: orbeckst * orbeckst@gmail.com

kain88-de commented 8 years ago

@orbeckst how is the review process going?

orbeckst commented 8 years ago

On 5 Jul, 2016, at 00:08, Max Linke notifications@github.com wrote:

@orbeckst how is the review process going?

I think I addressed all questions by the reviewer. They were all good comments and fairly easy to address. You can follow the discussion at https://github.com/scipy-conference/scipy_proceedings/pull/212

If you have any last minute changes or fixes please get them in soon.

orbeckst commented 8 years ago

The reviewer at scipy-conference/scipy_proceedings#212 recommended the manuscript for merging. We're done. Thanks everyone!

You can get the PDF as MDAnalysis_SciPy_2016.pdf.