datreant / scipy_proceedings Goto Github PK

Over the course of today and the rest of the weekend I'll be pulling together the proceedings paper for datreant. I have a basic skeleton together already on which I'll be nucleating the content, but is there anything in particular you think should be showcased?

Similar to MDAnalysis#2:

Note that this paper should not be an in-depth view of datreant but rather a big picture "advertisement". Primarily, it should introduce the library to a wider audience and quickly allow a reader to answer the questions

• Is datreant applicable to my problems?
• Should I (or one of my students) give it a try?
• What are advantages of using datreant? What might I be able to do with it that would be difficult or impossible otherwise?

We need to add citations where necessary for other Python packages. This is something I'd be happy for someone else to take on while I focus on building out content.

At the moment I've included a brief example of how the filesystem manipulation machinery built into Treants can be used with other packages, such as storing a pandas DataFrame and examining the file. This uses a randomly-generated DataFrame at the moment, but we could do better with a small DataFrame that has, e.g. tree nut data or bark varieties data. Currently the randomly-generated values are too long for the page column, too.

Anyone want to hammer on this? It's pretty isolated, but can be fun.

We should only work on the 2016 branch, so it's much more useful if it is the default on GitHub.

@datreant/coredevs – please add acknowledgements to the draft (e.g. any grants that you get paid on). Double-check with your PI if necessary. It is often very important that all grant numbers are listed because this is one way in which successes of grants are measured.

(We can fix this in review but it's good to be complete from the start.)

I am hammering on the main text now, and this issue is meant to serve as a discussion point for it as we move forward. The manuscript is coming along, but seeing as how time is short I'm drafting it quickly.

If you have a moment, have a look at what's there, and make it know here what you do/don't like about it so that we can quickly iterate it out. Thanks!

PRs are also welcome if the spirit moves you. I am happy to be the one to handle merge conflicts, so don't worry about falling behind.

When mentioning NhaA, just reference your JGP paper for context.

Fig 2 and 3 are not referenced in the text.