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

Response to Lex Nederbragt review #109

Merged
merged 21 commits into from
Jun 12, 2023
Merged

Response to Lex Nederbragt review #109

merged 21 commits into from
Jun 12, 2023

Conversation

ewallace
Copy link
Collaborator

@ewallace ewallace commented Jun 6, 2023

DRAFT response to Lex Nederbragt review at carpentries-lab/reviews#24 (comment)

Copy link
Collaborator

@emma-wilson emma-wilson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good good to me, thanks for making these changes @ewallace 😄

@ewallace
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ewallace commented Jun 10, 2023

I've gone through addressing most points in the review.

Big things left:

  • In 03-software, Lex found the exercise "Decompose this pseudocode statement into functions" a bit confusing...
  • The lesson only has one entry in the Glossary and could benefit from a more extensive list.

- Record different data types in individual tables as appropriate (e.g. sample metadata may be kept separately from sequencing experiment metadata)
- Use unique identifiers for every record in a table, allowing linkages between tables (e.g. sample identifiers are recorded in the sequencing experiment metadata)

Addresses #44
ameynert added 4 commits June 12, 2023 11:53
Simplified exercise by giving learners the function and asking them to call the function with different parameters, then use the function within a for loop.
Copy link
Collaborator

@ameynert ameynert left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks great - good review suggestions and well addressed.

@ewallace ewallace marked this pull request as ready for review June 12, 2023 13:09
@ewallace ewallace changed the title DRAFT: response to Lex Nederbragt review Response to Lex Nederbragt review Jun 12, 2023
Update lex-review-response branch before merge.
@ewallace ewallace merged commit 157988c into gh-pages Jun 12, 2023
2 checks passed
@ewallace ewallace deleted the lex-review-response branch June 12, 2023 18:14
zkamvar pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 31, 2023
* Summary and clarifications in 02-data_management.md

* Clarifications in 04-collaboration.md

* Simplify recap in 08-what_next.md

* changelog explanation and minor edits to 06-track_changes.md

* Clarify 05-project_organization.md

* Links, clarifications, in 05-project_organization.md

* Attribution to GEP paper in 02-data_management.md

* Attribute GEP paper in 03-software.md

* Attribute GEP paper in 04-collaboration.md

* Attribute GEP paper in 06-track_changes.md

* Attribute GEP paper in 07-manuscripts.md

* Add links in 03-software.md

* More links in 03-software.md

* Intro discussion notes in instructor guide

* Added links to resources on file naming

Addresses #42

* Clarified use of multiple tables

- Record different data types in individual tables as appropriate (e.g. sample metadata may be kept separately from sequencing experiment metadata)
- Use unique identifiers for every record in a table, allowing linkages between tables (e.g. sample identifiers are recorded in the sequencing experiment metadata)

Addresses #44

* Modifications to pseudocode exercise

Simplified exercise by giving learners the function and asking them to call the function with different parameters, then use the function within a for loop.

* Link fix for Azure

* Section heading change for multiple tables

* Expanded glossary

---------

Co-authored-by: ameynert <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Use discussions as feedback on where the learners are at
3 participants