Add a CITATION.cff

[MakisH]

As suggested by @uekerman, this points to https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18823855, until we have a proper publication of the material.

The file passes validation. I had to use type: article for the preferred-citation (presentation was not accepted).

Schema: https://github.com/citation-file-format/citation-file-format/blob/main/schema-guide.md

[uekerman]

With cff, I am always confused what goes on the top level and what on the preferred-citation level. Shouldn't doi, data-released, and version point to the repo itself?

[MakisH]

With cff, I am always confused what goes on the top level and what on the preferred-citation level. Shouldn't doi, data-released, and version point to the repo itself?

For that, we would need a release of the repository published on Zenodo, which is a different path (but the intended one by CFF).

[uekerman]

For that, we would need a release of the repository published on Zenodo, which is a different path (but the intended one by CFF).

This is probably what we should do in the future: release after each semester. So, we hack the system currently? And we are doing the best possible hack? :)

[MakisH]

Looking again at the description of the preferred-citation:

Credit redirection

Sometimes you want to redirect any credit your work may receive towards a second work (typically one of your own). A
common example is, that when you write software and then write a paper about it, you may want to be credited for the paper
instead of for the software itself. For this case, your CITATION.cff should contain metadata about the software at
the root of the CITATION.cff file, but additionally, you can add a preferred-citation key with the metadata of
the paper (or other work) you want people to cite. Usually, the message also reflects the authors' wishes on how they want to be credited.

authors:
  - family-names: Druskat
    given-names: Stephan
cff-version: 1.2.0
message: "If you use this software, please cite both the article from preferred-citation and the software itself."
preferred-citation:
  authors:
    - family-names: Druskat
      given-names: Stephan
  title: "Software paper about My Research Software"
  type: article
title: "My Research Software"

In the way I have currently written this, it corresponds to the repository version, which we indeed do not have (but should have). However, a version is not required in the minimal example:

A minimal example of a valid CITATION.cff file, that contains only the required keys, could look like this:

authors:
  - family-names: Druskat
    given-names: Stephan
cff-version: 1.2.0
message: "If you use this software, please cite it using these metadata."
title: "My Research Software"

Therefore, I suggest:

• Root:
  • Removing the version, since we don't have a release yet,
  • Remove the DOI, since the repository is not yet archived
• preferred-citation:
  • Move the DOI there
  • Move the version there, as v1

That would already pass validation.

However, I prefer to release the material now and put it on Zenodo, to be able to start modifying it. Would you like to reserve a DOI for it on Zenodo, or should I?

We still need a versioning system. Let's go with vYYYYMM.patch, similarly to the preCICE tutorials. If you are fine with this, I will prepare the release.

In this way, we get the snapshot archived, and we signal that we prefer the presentation to be cited.

[MakisH]

Reserved DOI https://doi.org/10.18419/DARUS-6463

Merging this PR to make a release and continue with the files upload.