search

greenelab / meta-review

Manuscript describing open collaborative writing with Manubot
https://greenelab.github.io/meta-review
Other
48 stars 21 forks source link

Ping manubot-rootstock contributors to determine if they want to be acknowledged #58

Closed cgreene closed 5 years ago

cgreene commented 6 years ago

See #50 for the approach we used there. Dividing these into two to avoid e-mail noise.

agitter commented 6 years ago

Hello manubot-rootstock contributors. We are writing a manuscript describing how manubot was used to write and coordinate our deep learning review. We would like to acknowledge you by name. Please let us know if you approve and, if so, what name you would like us to use.

@vsmalladi @rgieseke @slochower @adebali @petebachant

@evancofer already responded https://github.com/greenelab/meta-review/issues/50#issuecomment-397383234, but I'm noting his manubot-rootstock contribution here as well.

petebachant commented 6 years ago

My contributions were negligible, so no need for acknowledgment. Thanks for asking though--very cool process!

vsmalladi commented 6 years ago

I approve. Please use Venkat S. Malladi.

Let me know if I can help with the manuscript at all.

rgieseke commented 6 years ago

Sure, thanks! Please use

Robert Gieseke

evancofer commented 6 years ago

Thanks! Name to use is Evan M. Cofer

slochower commented 6 years ago

Great, thanks. David R. Slochower.

agitter commented 6 years ago

Hello manubot-rootstock beta testers. We are writing a manuscript describing how manubot was used to write and coordinate our deep learning review. We would like to acknowledge you by name for your feedback from OpenCon (https://github.com/greenelab/manubot-rootstock/pull/89). Please let us know if you approve and, if so, what name you would like us to use.

@zambujo @RaoOfPhysics @broadwym @schliebs @Hillea

agitter commented 6 years ago

Hello manubot-rootstock and manubot contributors. We are writing a manuscript describing how manubot was used to write and coordinate our deep learning review. We would like to acknowledge you by name for your contributions, suggestions, and discussion. Please let us know if you approve and, if so, what name you would like us to use.

@dsiddy @Miserlou @olgabot @jspauld @mlissner @anseljh @Sieboldianus @lierdakil

dsiddy commented 6 years ago

Thanks for your consideration in reaching out, @agitter. It's acknowledgement enough for me. 👌

adebali commented 6 years ago

Thanks, Ogun Adebali.

lierdakil commented 6 years ago

Thanks, but I really didn't contribute much, so I don't think you need to mention me personally. Mentioning pandoc-crossref would be nice if you're still using it though (IIRC you were using it at some point)

RaoOfPhysics commented 6 years ago

Thanks for reaching out, @agitter. :) If you think it is appropriate to do so, I would appreciate the acknowledgement. Please let me know if you're looking for future testing as well!

zambujo commented 6 years ago

I also appreciate you reaching out. My contribution was negligible: no need to acknowledge me at this point. Best wishes!

Sieboldianus commented 6 years ago

@agitter My contribution was so small, but feel free to acknowledge it. Thanks for managing this repo!

anseljh commented 6 years ago

Hi @agitter, I don't even remember what I did, if anything. If you can point me to that, I'd be happy to look at it.

Miserlou commented 6 years ago

Hey @agitter - all I did was file a bug report. Maybe in future you can have a weak form of a CLA in CONTRIBUTING.md so you don't need to ask retroactively.

agitter commented 5 years ago

@anseljh this was regarding the discussion about how to cite legal cases in https://github.com/greenelab/manubot/issues/1

anseljh commented 5 years ago

Thanks @agitter, I remember that now. Feel free to acknowledge if it was helpful, but I leave it up to you!

agitter commented 5 years ago

Closed by #77, but anyone who was pinged above and has not yet been acknowledged should still feel free to respond here.