Add changelog entry for v0.2.1

fatiando / rockhound

NOTICE: This library is no longer being developed. Use Ensaio instead (https://www.fatiando.org/ensaio). -- Download geophysical models/datasets and load them in Python

BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License

34 stars 15 forks source link

Add changelog entry for v0.2.1 #69

Closed santisoler closed 4 years ago

santisoler commented 4 years ago

I forgot to update the new DOI for version v0.2.0 on the Zenodo badge in README.rst and on the instructions in CITATION.rst. These new release just updates the DOI for v0.2.0. It does not issue a new DOI because there are no changes on code nor documentation.

Reminders

[ ] Run make format and make check to make sure the code follows the style guide.
[ ] Add tests for new features or tests that would have caught the bug that you're fixing.
[ ] Add new public functions/methods/classes to doc/api/index.rst.
[ ] Write detailed docstrings for all functions/methods.
[ ] If adding new functionality, add an example to the docstring, gallery, and/or tutorials.

santisoler commented 4 years ago

@leouieda As you could see, I forgot to update the DOI, so I thought it would be better to make a new release just to solve this issue. Besides, I've opened a PR (fatiando/contributing#11) for adding instructions to do so on MAINTENANCE.md.

Do you think it's necessary? Should we create a new version on Zenodo with a different DOI or keep the latest one for v0.2.0?

leouieda commented 4 years ago

Hi @santisoler that's fine and we don't need to archive this package on zenodo as well. To avoid this issue in the future, we can use the DOI for all versions: 10.5281/zenodo.3086001 That will automatically redirect to the latest one. If anyone wishes to cite a specific version they can still do so but it will make our lives easier. What do you think?

santisoler commented 4 years ago

I think I don't have a clear idea of what's the right way to do this. I thought it's better to generate a new DOI for each release, but maybe it's not completely necessary. Moreover, what happens when we publish a library on JOSS? Should we keep telling people to cite it through the JOSS DOI even if they are using a newer version?

santisoler commented 4 years ago

For this specific case I agree it's not necessary to issue a new DOI for it, so I think we can merge this PR and make the new release.

leouieda commented 4 years ago

For this specific case I agree it's not necessary to issue a new DOI for it, so I think we can merge this PR and make the new release.

:+1: yep, agreed.

Thanks for starting the conversation on Slack. This is an unsolved problem and I don't think there a clear way to do this. But we can experiment and change tactics later on in case we find a better way.

leouieda commented 4 years ago

The important thing is to not get frozen in place until we find a solution (which could take a really long time). There isn't anything inherently wrong with the way we've been doing things.