Add slack and new publication info to readme

[joeloskarsson]

Describe your changes

This PR just contains some updates and clarifications to the readme. In particular:

1. Restructure references to publications as its own section in readme
2. Add reference to new, extended publication with links to branches where corresponding code can be found
3. Add links to join slack channel
4. Clarify state of ongoing work with making repo area-agnostic
5. Update text about Lightning issue with multi-gpu eval

Type of change

• 🐛 Bug fix (non-breaking change that fixes an issue)
• ✨ New feature (non-breaking change that adds functionality)
• 💥 Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• 📖 Documentation (Addition or improvements to documentation)

Checklist before requesting a review

• My branch is up-to-date with the target branch - if not update your fork with the changes from the target branch (use pull with --rebase option if possible).
• I have performed a self-review of my code
• For any new/modified functions/classes I have added docstrings that clearly describe its purpose, expected inputs and returned values
• I have placed in-line comments to clarify the intent of any hard-to-understand passages of my code
• I have updated the README to cover introduced code changes
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• I have given the PR a name that clearly describes the change, written in imperative form (context).
• I have requested a reviewer and an assignee (assignee is responsible for merging). This applies only if you have write access to the repo, otherwise feel free to tag a maintainer to add a reviewer and assignee.

Checklist for reviewers

Each PR comes with its own improvements and flaws. The reviewer should check the following:

• the code is readable
• the code is well tested
• the code is documented (including return types and parameters)
• the code is easy to maintain

Author checklist after completed review

• I have added a line to the CHANGELOG describing this change, in a section
  reflecting type of change (add section where missing):
  • added: when you have added new functionality
  • changed: when default behaviour of the code has been changed
  • fixes: when your contribution fixes a bug

Checklist for assignee

• PR is up to date with the base branch
• the tests pass
• author has added an entry to the changelog (and designated the change as added, changed or fixed)
• Once the PR is ready to be merged, squash commits and merge the PR.

[mpvginde]

Be careful when publishing this kind of information. I was involved in another project where we couldn't add any new members to the slack channel because bots had spammed the slack join link.

[sadamov]

That's a good point 😱 Currently, members from a curated list of domains (unis, met services mostly) can join without invite. The link you are about to post can be used 400-times. If abused, the link can be deactivated and a new one generated. All bots, must be removed manually by the workspace owner. That sounds annoying...

Alternatively, we can set up admin admission via notification in one of our slack channels (https://slack.com/help/articles/115004854783-Require-admin-approval-for-workspace-invitations). Since, we are all admins this could be a good solution. What do you think?

[joeloskarsson]

Yes thanks for pointing this out 👐 I did not know if bots would be an issue with slack, but clearly it can be then.

I don't really get what will happen if you set up this admin approval. I guess you will not immediately join through the link then, but send a request to join? And then any admin can accept it. In that case we would definitely not want the option where requests are sent to all admins via Slackbot, as then everyone will be spammed by every request. But one can set it to post the requests to a specific channel, which could work fine?

[mpvginde]

@sadamov, Yes I think that might mitigate the problem. If I remember well, the issue was that the bots activate the join link, but never actually join the slack channel. Resulting in 400 people in limbo for activation. Which blocks any new user from joining.
Using admin rights to actively reject them might solve the issue. It will also give you an idea if the link is getting abused, so that you can remove it if it becomes problematic.

[sadamov]

okay now it's set up in a way that a new joiner will be announced in #random where any admin can accept their request to join. I don't expect there to be too many, otherwise I can create a separate channel for this.

[joeloskarsson]

Maybe a good idea to make a specific channel for it? Or otherwise make a post to clarify that invite requests will show up in random, so people are not confused about it (e.g. if someones colleague joins it might not be obvious where to find the message to accept the request).

[joeloskarsson]

I'm thinking that I'll also clarify in the readme the procedure for joining slack, so people aren't deterred when you have to request to join

[sadamov]

looks good, can be merged
NOTE: newcomers to the slack workspace must be accepted by any admin, who will be notified in the slack #random channel.