-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 93
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Ancient europe #941
Ancient europe #941
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks good @AliPearson, thanks! I left a couple of comments/questions below.
author="Allentoft et al.", | ||
year="in progress", | ||
doi="in progress", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Our defacto policy for model inclusion is that the model appears in a publication. Do you have an idea of when the manuscript is expected to appear? I think a preprint ought to be fine for inclusion here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
preprint definitely counts as "publication".
Just checking if you know what to do next, @AliPearson? Either fix up the things mentioned above or discuss them, then push a new commit; hopefully that will fix the failing check (the docs build) as well. If all is good then, you'll then squash & rebsae and we'll merge! Let us know if you need more direction than that. Thanks, this looks great! |
Sorry to be slow! I’ll make those changes and push it asap
… On 25 May 2021, at 17:05, Peter Ralph ***@***.***> wrote:
Just checking if you know what to do next, @AliPearson <https://github.com/AliPearson>? Either fix up the things mentioned above or discuss them, then push a new commit; hopefully that will fix the failing check (the docs build) as well. If all is good then, you'll then squash & rebsae and we'll merge! Let us know if you need more direction than that. Thanks, this looks great!
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#941 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APKIMAXWVPD2IBLEKDIYGX3TPPDDHANCNFSM45CEYZYQ>.
|
No worries - just checking in! |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #941 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 99.56% 99.43% -0.14%
==========================================
Files 103 84 -19
Lines 3248 2650 -598
Branches 415 296 -119
==========================================
- Hits 3234 2635 -599
- Misses 6 7 +1
Partials 8 8
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
Does this now look good? Ready to rebase? |
Yep, this looks like it's almost ready to go @AliPearson, I think we're just waiting for something citable (which can be a preprint)? |
hey @AliPearson -- any updates here? would love to merge this in |
Hi, @AliPearson - we're getting set to QC a bunch of things, so it'd be a good time to get this in - is there a good publication to cite? |
I think it's the recent Allentoft et al. manuscript: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.05.04.490594v2 |
Oh, awesome (and, congrats!). I thought it might be that. |
I'll add the citation and rebase this; then we should be good to go (do you remember otherwise, @AliPearson?) |
Ok - the rebase was a bit painful, but I got it sorted. I've updated your repository (since the one this PR points to), @AliPearson, in case you're not familiar with this, you'll have to do something like |
I've confirmed with @AliPearson that this is good to go, so I'll merge this and open the QC issue. |
Added demographic model of Ancient Europe.