[Metric] TEST — ignore, verifying the DOI check workflow #88

Activity

1. mbel-tech

   added

   metric-requestProposal for a new behavioural metric (see .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/metric_request.yml)Proposal for a new behavioural metric (see .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/metric_request.yml)

   on Aug 25, 2026
2. github-actions

   added

   needs-doiMetric request is missing a DOI; set and cleared by metric-request-check.ymlMetric request is missing a DOI; set and cleared by metric-request-check.yml

   on Aug 25, 2026
3. github-actions commented on Aug 25, 2026

   

   github-actionsBot

   on Aug 25, 2026 – with GitHub Actions

   More actions

   Thanks for the proposal. I couldn't find a DOI in this request.

   Every metric Track2Data ships carries a scientific reference,
   published in docs/METRIC_REFERENCES.csv
   and shown in the app's ⓘ dialog, so a DOI is what lets this
   proposal become one of those rows.

   Please edit the issue to include the DOI of the paper defining
   this metric — a bare DOI like 10.1006/jtbi.2002.3065, not a
   URL or a full citation. This label clears itself once you do.

   If the measure is genuinely standard with no single originating
   paper, say so in a comment and we'll take it from there.
4. github-actions

   removed

   needs-doiMetric request is missing a DOI; set and cleared by metric-request-check.ymlMetric request is missing a DOI; set and cleared by metric-request-check.yml

   on Aug 25, 2026
5. mbel-tech commented on Aug 25, 2026

   

   mbel-tech

   on Aug 25, 2026

   OwnerAuthor

   More actions

   Closing — this was a throwaway issue to verify the metric-request DOI check end to end. It worked: the workflow applied needs-doi with an explanatory comment when the DOI was malformed, and cleared the label once a real DOI was edited in.
6. mbel-tech

   closed this as completedon Aug 25, 2026