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

Support Edited Volumes and Other Contributor Types #981

Open
wants to merge 9 commits into
base: dev
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

alexdryden
Copy link

@alexdryden alexdryden commented Feb 22, 2022

This allows the publishing of Edited Volumes and other books that don't have a book level author, as well as implementing the other parameters that @SteelWagstaff outlined here idea/issue134 that display other contributor types on title pages.

This pull request works in conjunction with the corresponding pressbooks pull request. See that pull request for testing and details.

@alexdryden alexdryden changed the title Support Edited Volumes with No Authors Support Edited Volumes and Other Contributor Types Feb 22, 2022
@SteelWagstaff
Copy link
Member

hi @alexdryden thanks for your PRs! Our team will review and offer comments/feedback on this soon, I hope.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 1, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #981 (6fe3735) into dev (fadd05a) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##              dev     #981   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   47.20%   47.20%           
=======================================
  Files           4        4           
  Lines         500      500           
=======================================
  Hits          236      236           
  Misses        264      264           

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update fadd05a...6fe3735. Read the comment docs.

@SteelWagstaff
Copy link
Member

@alexdryden we didn't get to your PRs this sprint (ended today), unfortunately. I've created a new issue for consideration for our next sprint: pressbooks/pressbooks#2695, which I hope will be accepted into our upcoming sprint (planning for this on Monday). Sorry to keep you waiting -- but thank you for the impetus to keep this idea alive and move forward with a proposed improvement.

@alexdryden
Copy link
Author

Thanks for the update @SteelWagstaff!

@SteelWagstaff
Copy link
Member

@alexdryden it's embarrassing how behind we are on this. One of our devs reviewed and came up with a few suggested improvements but I haven't been able to write them up just yet. I think they had to do with tests (easier to address), display options in the webbook and consistency with Chicago style guidelines in the ebooks/PDF exports. I'm very sorry we've made you wait on this so long, but it will probably be a few more weeks before we can handle this properly.

@alexdryden
Copy link
Author

No worries @SteelWagstaff! Thanks for the update and looking forward to incorporating the feedback!

@alexdryden
Copy link
Author

Hi @SteelWagstaff! I just wanted to bump this in case you have some time pass along any feedback. I'm going to do my next sprint planning at the end of the month and it would be great if I could include this!

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.

None yet

2 participants