What's the Scope of the Publications Page?

[kmdalton]

It's not clear what publications should be included in the publications page. We should come up with a policy and document it on the README.

Discussion copied from #49

@tjlane

Last thing: presumably we don't want ALL the "pubs" published by rs-astros? Who counts? Should my latest random papers be in??

@dennisbrookner

My original vision for (the bottom half of) this page was to include any and all pubs that cite RSS packages, as a form of boasting about how widely and frequently our packages are used in the literature. (It doesn't need to include any papers published by astronauts that don't cite any of the packages, but I suspect those might be hard to come by!)

My opinion is that having all of these papers in one place is a nice concept. I think the dream is that anyone out in the wild who uses cites of our packages in a paper could reach out and get themselves featured, and we'd happily cross-promote their paper. But, if this starts to get unwieldy, we could certainly reconsider. We could also move the pubs part to a separate page. With some amount of work, I could figure out how to add a collapsable header for each year, which would tidy up the list.

[tjlane]

@dennisbrookner definitely a great idea to collect all the relevant publications in one place, and good to get started sooner vs. trying to round up things later!

For papers that either are rss developments (code) or use rss programs, I think the criteria are clear enough.

For all other papers authored by rss "members": we would have to be clear about what counts as membership -- that gets a bit tricky. I'd be inclined to simply drop that category for now.

In an ideal future, we might have people who are funded to work on rss stuff, in which case any publication from them would likely count as a 3rd category, made formal by an acknowledgement in the paper (vs. a citation).

Thoughts?