Doc fixes for joss review

[MaceKuailv]

I am going to group the first patch of fixes (mainly on documentations) in this PR.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (4695973) 94.84% compared to head (0fe1fa1) 94.28%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #95      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   94.84%   94.28%   -0.57%     
==========================================
  Files          11       11              
  Lines        2658     2658              
  Branches      712      712              
==========================================
- Hits         2521     2506      -15     
- Misses         50       66      +16     
+ Partials       87       86       -1     

Files	Coverage Δ
seaduck/eulerian.py	94.82% <100.00%> (ø)
seaduck/kernel_weight.py	95.15% <100.00%> (ø)
seaduck/lagrangian.py	97.40% <100.00%> (ø)
seaduck/ocedata.py	96.63% <100.00%> (ø)
seaduck/topology.py	83.66% <100.00%> (-4.30%)	⬇️

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[MaceKuailv]

This test failed because I added

raise Exception("I am a very bad boy!!") 

in one of the notebooks. and jupyter book is able to capture that.

This is to test #92 and it seems to be working.

[MaceKuailv]

After turning on -W --keep-going in Jupyter Book, every warning in the documentation, including from both notebook tutorials and the help docstrings, is now captured in the CI system.

The fact that the docs-build CI test passes means that both #91 and #92 are addressed.

[MaceKuailv]

Just added a new file on how to use the github issue channel properly. This should address issue #93

[MaceKuailv]

@pnsaevik Thank you very much for your suggestions. Please let me know if this PR addresses some of the problems and if I understand you correctly. I will merge this branch if you think at least some of the issue is resolved.

Please feel welcomed to raise other issues or continue the discussion in existing ones. I really appreciate your comments.

[pnsaevik]

I confirm that the pull request resolves issue #90, #91, #92 and #93. Good to hear that the comments are helpful :-) The package is very interesting, especially the Tracmass-style particle transport. I might try and write a plugin for ROMS ocean data some day.

[MaceKuailv]

That's very encouraging!

I actually plan to do that as well. The only problem is that I don't have a ROMS dataset at hand. I think it should be easy (fingers crossed) because I always have that in mind and kept the grid handling pretty modular.