-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13
Add workflows #52
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
base: mkdocs
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Add workflows #52
Conversation
.github/config.yml
Outdated
 | ||
🎉 Congrats on merging your first pull request in this repo! We appreciate your contribution to the Physiopy community! | ||
:eyes: Please check that your contribution is correctly reported in the repo's README and on Physiopy's website! |
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.
Should we add the hyperlink to the Physiopy website home page ?
https://physiopy.github.io/
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.
see add link
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.
Re: mkdocs, I'm not sure that that would change anything - maybe the simplest thing is to assume it won't and then test it? It's good to know since I imagine this might also have implications for the Community Practices repo!
I do think it's good to have a contributors readme but was wondering about the directive to check that contributions are accurately reflected on the website. Is the website page one that gets manually updated every so often? I wouldn't want someone to expect to see changes reflected there instantaneously.
Closes #51
Adds workflows
Proposed Changes
Questions for reviewers
Change Type
bugfix
refactoring
infrastructure
documentation
other
Checklist before review