feat: add check_publication_list_format check - #710
Merged
Conversation
rly
reviewed
Jun 30, 2026
Co-authored-by: Ryan Ly <310197+rly@users.noreply.github.com>
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev #710 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 79.44% 83.04% +3.60%
==========================================
Files 48 48
Lines 1897 1923 +26
==========================================
+ Hits 1507 1597 +90
+ Misses 390 326 -64
🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
rly
approved these changes
Jun 30, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Split out from #651 per @h-mayorquin's review suggestion to merge the non-network check quickly while the DOI-resolution (network-based) check gets more design discussion.
Changes
check_publication_list_format, which detects comma-separated DOIs/URLs stuffed into a singlerelated_publicationsentry (e.g."https://doi.org/10.1234/abc,https://doi.org/10.5678/def") that should instead be separate list entries.BEST_PRACTICE_VIOLATION(stronger than the originalBEST_PRACTICE_SUGGESTION): therelated_publicationsschema defines a 1-D array where each element is one publication reference, so combining multiple into one comma-separated string violates the intended data structure, and there are no obvious false positives.The network-based
check_publication_doi_resolvescheck from #651 is intentionally not included here; it needs further discussion (offline/firewall/transient-failure false positives, canary-request safeguard).fix #419