/assign-me

👋 Hey @gepetton, thank you for your interest in this issue! 🎉

We're excited to have you on board. Start by exploring our Contributing guidelines, and don't forget to check out our workspace setup guidelines to get started smoothly.

In case you encounter failing tests during development, please check our developer FAQs!

Having any questions or issues? Feel free to ask here on GitHub. Need help setting up your local workspace? Join the conversation on JabRef's Gitter chat. And don't hesitate to open a (draft) pull request early on to show the direction it is heading towards. This way, you will receive valuable feedback.

Happy coding! 🚀

⏳ Please note, you will be automatically unassigned if the issue isn't closed within 45 days (by 24 April 2025). A maintainer can also add the "📌 Pinned"" label to prevent automatic unassignment.

📋 Assignment Update

Hi @gepetton, due to inactivity, you have been unassigned from this issue.

Hello! @koppor
I’ve updated the PR with all the requested changes, but I noticed I’ve been unassigned from the issue. Could I kindly ask for some feedback on whether there’s anything specific in the PR that might need further attention? Thank you!

/assign-me

👋 Hey @luks-santos, thank you for your interest in this issue! 🎉

We're excited to have you on board. Start by exploring our Contributing guidelines, and don't forget to check out our workspace setup guidelines to get started smoothly.

In case you encounter failing tests during development, please check our developer FAQs!

Having any questions or issues? Feel free to ask here on GitHub. Need help setting up your local workspace? Join the conversation on JabRef's Gitter chat. And don't hesitate to open a (draft) pull request early on to show the direction it is heading towards. This way, you will receive valuable feedback.

Happy coding! 🚀

This is fine for now, but I think for the future, when the "Add JabRef suggested groups" action is selected, we should show the list of suggested groups along a brief explanation of what these groups represent and the reasoning behind adding them, and let users select/deselect groups they are interested in.

Hi, I accidentally squashed commits while pulling from main, so some commits now appear under my name. I’ll clean up the history and open a new PR. Sorry for the mix-up!

/assign-me

👋 Hey @luks-santos, thank you for your interest in this issue! 🎉

We're excited to have you on board. Start by exploring our Contributing guidelines, and don't forget to check out our workspace setup guidelines to get started smoothly.

In case you encounter failing tests during development, please check our developer FAQs!

Having any questions or issues? Feel free to ask here on GitHub. Need help setting up your local workspace? Join the conversation on JabRef's Gitter chat. And don't hesitate to open a (draft) pull request early on to show the direction it is heading towards. This way, you will receive valuable feedback.

Happy coding! 🚀

I've been writing a lot lately, using JabRef and argue the suggested groups should be:

• "entry import" (maybe could be called "Entries to collect" or "Queued") and
• "entries with a linked file"
• "entries without a linked file"
• "entries without groups" --> Only/most useful, if users do not have automatic search and keyword collection groups.

I will give reasons down below in my workflow.

Here are all my groups btw.:

Here are the settings and regexes for some of the groups:

entry import = explicit selection
paywalled = explicit selection
entries without a group: groups !=~ .+
entries with a linked file: file =~ .+ AND file !=~ www.semanticscholar.org
entries without a linked file [exclusions]: file !=~ .+ AND groups !=~ paywalled AND groups !=~ "0003 Restrictive Copyright"
not read yet: readstatus !=~ .+ AND file=~ .+
cited = explicit selection

Most important groups

Over the weeks I have zoned in on using only two groups that have maximized the speed of my workflow.

• entry import
• entries with a linked file
• entries without a linked file

My workflow is therefore:

1. go to entry import group
   • Reasoning: I don't want to be in a group with many entries to avoid confusion, when I drop the entry and I am not sure, where it is in that group. Basically avoids having to scroll and search for the entry once I have dropped it. Avoids confusion, if I already have that entry in the library and the entry merge dialogue pops. Allows me to select other entries and go back to entry import for most recently imported entries. It's like a buffer zone. A temporary memory to hold the entry, until I am not going to need that entry as often anymore, then I remove that entry from the entry import group.
2. I collect the entry data
   • often by copy pasting bibtex data that I found on the scientific journals website on the internet. Then I clean that data by using import data from ID and check, if everything is correct. Very often, I have to add a URL manually to the bibtex data.
   • If bibtex data is not available, such as what happens when citing a newspaper, I enter the data manually via the entry editor.
   • JabRef offers other methods to import data, but those are the ones that I think are the most reliable, as they are semi-manual.
3. I download the pdf or file that is associated with that entry from the internet and drop the file on the entry to link the entry with the file. (The order here is important. Importing the file and then adding entry data is worse, because I usually have to go through the entry merge dialogue, because the imported data from the pdf files was wrong)
4. I read the pdf, write and cite the entry that I just imported.
5. Search for text passages within entries with linked files. and cite those entries
6. Collect a file post mortem using the "paywalled" or "entries without a linked file" groups.
   • Reason: Sometimes I collect entry data without having a file that goes along with it, then come back to that entry later to finally update the entry to have a linked file. Often, when the entry was paywalled and the paywall is gone. Or when I didn't have the time to download the file. Or when I was searching for entries outside my institutions VPN (therefore being paywalled out from some sites).

Explanation of step 5 (search within entries linked files) in more detail

When I am writing and I argue for something that I know I have read somewhere in the scientific articles I have in my JabRef bibliography, I usually use linked file search to find out where exactly I have read that and find related passages in other papers about that particular search term. I end up with one or more citationkey(s) and page numbers. Those are the two things that I need in my paper to cite the entry.

For this to work properly and in a fast way, I exclusively ended up using the group "entries with a linked file".
Why? Because it doesn't make sense to search in any other group.

• all entries: It will contain entries that I cannot cite, because I haven't read the paper.
• entries without a group will contain entries without a linked file.
• not read yet: will contain entries without linked files
• read: is a explicit selection group and I often forget to mark an entry that I have read it, then I have to check what I have read and what not. Marking an entry as read slows down my workflow. This group wastes my attentionspan and brainpower.
• skimmed: is a explicit selection group and I often forget to mark an entry that I have skimmed it and then I have to check what I have read and what not. Marking an entry as skimmed slows down my workflow. This group wastes my attentionspan and brainpower.

All entries with linked files are usually entries that I am allowed to and can cite from, because I actually can read the paper, unless there are some copyright issues.