Closed jglev closed 6 years ago
Regarding "signing the files", we use the git history to take care of that. For example, see GitHub's blame for a file in this repo.
Regarding documentation, we do want to make things clearly documented. Usually, you want to write the doc as you make the files and functions. Sometimes code is clear and doesn't necessarily need docstrings. Are there specific areas of the code where documentation is lacking?
I think the main area where this repo is lacking documentation is in the README. We should update the README to better describe:
As a reference, you can look at greenelab/crossref
to see how we might want to bolster the README.
@publicus sort of related to the above discussion, it would be good to add a note to the README letting users know how to rerun this analysis and to modify for another university.
@dhimmel Agreed! I can work on that, likely on Friday morning. Does that timing work for you?
Agreed! I can work on that, likely on Friday morning. Does that timing work for you?
Sure this is not a time sensitive change although it'd be nice to get it done.
I'm opening this issue as a reminder that, per the Lab onboarding documentation checklist, we need to do the following at some point for code files: