NatLabRockies / NatLabRockies/rdtools
Consider using ReviewNB for notebook code reviews
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 189
- Forks
- 82
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
Jupyter Notebooks are great for documentation, however, reviewing code in notebooks is a pain and often requires reviewing changes locally.
Since the rdtools documentation is written mainly in notebooks I think it's worth considering using the ReviewNB GitHub app. ReviewNB integrates into the GitHub PR discussion flow and gives the option to view the new and old versions of the notebook side by side with changes highlighted. It is possible to add comments to specific notebook cells, which then show up in the PR discussion.
It's free for open-source projects and very easy to get started with, so if anything I would recommend trying it out for a short period to see if it adds value to the project.
You can check out an example PR with a single review here, where the interface looks like this:

Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reviewing the ReviewNB app documentation and the linked example pull request to understand its GitHub PR integration and notebook diff workflow. Check how rdtools documentation notebooks are currently reviewed, then define what a short trial would involve and what evidence would show that it adds value. No repository files or tests are named.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- github, jupyter-notebook, python
- Domain
- developer-experience, documentation
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100