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.

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

[PyOpenSci] Basic Usage notebook needs cleanup / better flow #1282

Closed
1 task done
Zeitsperre opened this issue Jan 24, 2023 · 3 comments
Closed
1 task done

[PyOpenSci] Basic Usage notebook needs cleanup / better flow #1282

Zeitsperre opened this issue Jan 24, 2023 · 3 comments
Labels
DACCS docs Improvements to documenation support Questions and help for users/developers
Milestone

Comments

@Zeitsperre
Copy link
Collaborator

Generic Issue

  • xclim version: 0.40.0
  • Python version: Any
  • Operating System: All

Description

One of the suggestions coming from the PyOpenSci review process was to clean up the Basic Usage notebook to make it a bit more consistent with the rest of the documentation (pyOpenSci/software-submission#73). The flow of the text needs a bit of work.

For context, this issue is not blocking the PyOpenSci review process, but would be nice to have.

Code of Conduct

  • I agree to follow this project's Code of Conduct
@Zeitsperre Zeitsperre added support Questions and help for users/developers docs Improvements to documenation labels Jan 24, 2023
@Zeitsperre Zeitsperre added this to the v0.41 milestone Jan 24, 2023
@huard huard added the DACCS label Feb 6, 2023
@Zeitsperre Zeitsperre changed the title Basic Usage notebook needs cleanup / better flow [PyOpenSci] Basic Usage notebook needs cleanup / better flow Feb 27, 2023
@Zeitsperre Zeitsperre modified the milestones: v0.41, v0.42 Feb 27, 2023
@Zeitsperre
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@NickleDave

Changes that were just merged to the main branch (#1308) included modifications to the usage page (one of your initial comments). If you're interested in taking another look at that, please let me know. Otherwise, I'll consider this issue closed in the next few days.

Thanks again!

@NickleDave
Copy link

Hi @Zeitsperre, I took a quick look and see in the PR where revisions were made in places where there were minor typos / unclear language. LGTM!!! Thank you for noting this and integrating it into the review.

@Zeitsperre
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Awesome! All the best!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
DACCS docs Improvements to documenation support Questions and help for users/developers
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants