Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Authorship Criteria #195

Open
27 tasks done
certik opened this issue Jun 14, 2016 · 34 comments
Open
27 tasks done

Authorship Criteria #195

certik opened this issue Jun 14, 2016 · 34 comments

Comments

@certik
Copy link
Member

certik commented Jun 14, 2016 •
edited
Loading

Dear co-authors (@asmeurer, @smichr, @mattpap, @certik, @skirpichev, @mrocklin, @aktech, @scolobb, @moorepants, @leosartaj, @thilinarmtb, @flacjacket, @ellisonbg, @rpmuller, @Upabjojr, @hargup, @shivamvats, @fredrik-johansson, @fabianp, @mattcurry, @aterrel, @rouckas, @ashutoshsaboo, @isuruf, @Sumith1896, @rc, @scopatz), here are the ICMJE authorship criteria that we follow:

  1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the
    acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
  2. Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual
    content; AND
  3. Final approval of the version to be published; AND
  4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that
    questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are
    appropriately investigated and resolved.

I have verified that all of you satisfy 1. and 2. (and the info is easily accessible in authors.md for anyone to browse). The version to be published is 9fb21e8, can you all give a final approval of this version (thus satisfying 3.) and also agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved (thus satisfying 4.).

Just post a comment that you agree. If you do not agree to 3. or 4., let me know.

These people agreed to 3. and 4. below in a comment:
@certik
Copy link
Member Author

certik commented Jun 14, 2016

For myself, I approve the version and agree to 4.

@certik certik mentioned this issue Jun 14, 2016
Open
@asmeurer
Copy link
Member

I approve the version and agree to 4.

@certik certik mentioned this issue Jun 14, 2016
Merged
@rouckas
Copy link
Collaborator

rouckas commented Jun 14, 2016

I approve the final version and agree to 4.

@moorepants
Copy link
Member

Have we already submitted to PeerJ and been accepted without revisions? Or is this a request for what version will be submitted to PeerJ?

@rpmuller
Copy link
Contributor

I approve the final version and agree to 4.

@Sumith1896
Copy link
Member

I approve the version and agree to 4.

1 similar comment
@scolobb
Copy link
Collaborator

scolobb commented Jun 14, 2016

I approve the version and agree to 4.

@flacjacket
Copy link
Member

I approve the version and agree to 4.

On Tue, Jun 14, 2016, 17:59 Sergiu Ivanov [email protected] wrote:

I approve the version and agree to 4.

—

You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#195 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AApkheZGJxDOEnG1nqjuNirSdiKpBlxLks5qLzIzgaJpZM4I1wuC
.

@shivamvats
Copy link
Member

I approve the final version and agree to 4.

@mattcurry
Copy link
Collaborator

I approve this version and agree to 4.

@certik
Copy link
Member Author

certik commented Jun 14, 2016 •
edited
Loading

@moorepants we submitted to PeerJ together with SIAM, but we didn't get an agreement with each co-author about 3. and 4. These are our authorship criteria, it's up to us when we do it. Now is a good time to do it, since the revision above is our final version, that we will submit to PeerJ.

@rc
Copy link
Contributor

rc commented Jun 15, 2016

I approve this version and agree to 4.

@leosartaj
Copy link
Member

I approve the version and agree to 4.

@aktech
Copy link
Member

aktech commented Jun 15, 2016

I approve the version and agree to 4.

On Wed, Jun 15, 2016, 10:30 AM Sartaj Singh [email protected]
wrote:

I approve the version and agree to 4.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#195 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AFYuRV_qtBPjKnhB7yi067mGsFGxibWsks5qL4bogaJpZM4I1wuC
.

@thilinarmtb
Copy link
Contributor

I approve the version and agree to 4.

1 similar comment
@isuruf
Copy link
Member

isuruf commented Jun 15, 2016

I approve the version and agree to 4.

@fabianp
Copy link
Contributor

fabianp commented Jun 15, 2016

I approve the version and agree to 4
On Jun 15, 2016 7:59 AM, "Isuru Fernando" [email protected] wrote:

I approve the version and agree to 4.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#195 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AAQ8h2V7GkvtG4vCUB6FwjKrmkI8QIlDks5qL5SpgaJpZM4I1wuC
.

@rpmuller
Copy link
Contributor

I approve the version and agree to 4.

On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 11:00 PM Sartaj Singh [email protected]
wrote:

I approve the version and agree to 4.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#195 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AAchsgxdisotaRcfnlt3Bc6CHbcHk7F5ks5qL4bpgaJpZM4I1wuC
.

@ashutoshsaboo
Copy link
Collaborator

I approve the version and agree to 4. 👍

@fredrik-johansson
Copy link
Collaborator

I approve the version and agree to 4.

1 similar comment
@Upabjojr
Copy link
Collaborator

I approve the version and agree to 4.

@hargup
Copy link
Contributor

hargup commented Jun 15, 2016

I too approve the version and agree to 4.

@aterrel
Copy link
Collaborator

aterrel commented Jun 15, 2016

I approve the version and agree to 4

@mattpap
Copy link
Member

mattpap commented Jun 15, 2016

I approve the version and agree to 4.

@certik
Copy link
Member Author

certik commented Jun 15, 2016

@skirpichev wrote me in private email:

Yeah, I approve this version and agree to 4.

Feel free to quote me in that thread.

@smichr
Copy link
Member

smichr commented Jun 16, 2016

I approve the version and agree to 4.

@scopatz
Copy link
Collaborator

scopatz commented Jun 16, 2016

approve

@certik
Copy link
Member Author

certik commented Jun 16, 2016

@scopatz, to be clear, do you also agree to do 4.?

@scopatz
Copy link
Collaborator

scopatz commented Jun 16, 2016

explicitly, yes

@mrocklin
Copy link
Member

Approve (3) and agree (4)

On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 8:53 AM, Anthony Scopatz [email protected]
wrote:

explicitly, yes

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#195 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/AASszFsGA2de5Jo94eYzr6rBf05FuGoIks5qMXGBgaJpZM4I1wuC
.

@ellisonbg
Copy link
Member

I approve of 3 and agree to 4.

@moorepants
Copy link
Member

moorepants commented Jul 6, 2016 •
edited
Loading

I agree to submit the current version to PeerJ. I'll approve the final submission after it is reviewed and we've completed the revisions. I don't think we can approve #3 until we have the final version in hand.

@certik
Copy link
Member Author

certik commented Jul 6, 2016

@moorepants just to be on the safe side, are you giving your approval to the version 9fb21e8, as indicated in the issue above? If there are further revisions to be needed, we will approve those later.

Also, do you agree to do 4.?

@moorepants
Copy link
Member

Yes, I agree to the version you posted and to 4.

@sympy sympy locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 6, 2016
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests