`sunpy` Review

[nabobalis]

Submitting Author: Nabil Freij (@nabobalis)
All current maintainers: @ehsteve,@dpshelio,@wafels,@ayshih,@Cadair,@nabobalis,@dstansby,@DanRyanIrish,@wtbarnes,@ConorMacBride,@alasdairwilson,@hayesla,@vn-ki
Package Name: sunpy
One-Line Description of Package: Python for Solar Physics
Repository Link: https://github.com/sunpy/sunpy
Version submitted: 5.0.1
EiC: @isabelizimm
Editor: @cmarmo
Reviewer 1: @Septaris
Reviewer 2: @nutjob4life
Archive:
Version accepted: 5.1.1
JOSS DOI:
Date accepted (month/day/year): 01/18/2024

---

Code of Conduct & Commitment to Maintain Package

• I agree to abide by pyOpenSci's Code of Conduct during the review process and in maintaining my package after should it be accepted.
• I have read and will commit to package maintenance after the review as per the pyOpenSci Policies Guidelines.

Description

• sunpy is a community-developed, free and open-source solar data analysis environment for Python. It includes an interface for searching and downloading data from multiple data providers, data containers for image and time series data, commonly used solar coordinate frames and associated transformations, as well as other functionality needed for solar data analysis.

Scope

• Please indicate which category or categories.
  Check out our package scope page to learn more about our
  scope. (If you are unsure of which category you fit, we suggest you make a pre-submission inquiry):

  • Data retrieval
  • Data extraction
  • Data processing/munging
  • Data deposition
  • Data validation and testing
  • Data visualization[^1]
  • Workflow automation
  • Citation management and bibliometrics
  • Scientific software wrappers
  • Database interoperability

Domain Specific

• Geospatial
• Education

Community Partnerships

If your package is associated with a pyOpenSci partner community, please check below:

• astropy
• sunpy
• Pangeo
  • My package adheres to the Pangeo standards listed in the pyOpenSci peer review guidebook

Technical checks

For details about the pyOpenSci packaging requirements, see our packaging guide. Confirm each of the following by checking the box. This package:

• does not violate the Terms of Service of any service it interacts with.
• uses an OSI approved license.
• contains a README with instructions for installing the development version.
• includes documentation with examples for all functions.
  I will need to double check the examples, we have documentation for all public API
• contains a tutorial with examples of its essential functions and uses.
• has a test suite.
• has continuous integration setup, such as GitHub Actions CircleCI, and/or others.

Are you OK with Reviewers Submitting Issues and/or pull requests to your Repo Directly?

This option will allow reviewers to open smaller issues that can then be linked to PR's rather than submitting a more dense text based review. It will also allow you to demonstrate addressing the issue via PR links.

• Yes I am OK with reviewers submitting requested changes as issues to my repo. Reviewers will then link to the issues in their submitted review.

Confirm each of the following by checking the box.

• I have read the author guide.
• I expect to maintain this package for at least 2 years and can help find a replacement for the maintainer (team) if needed.

Please fill out our survey

• Last but not least please fill out our pre-review survey. This helps us track
  submission and improve our peer review process. We will also ask our reviewers
  and editors to fill this out.

P.S. Have feedback/comments about our review process? Leave a comment here

Editor and Review Templates

The editor template can be found here.

The review template can be found here.

Comments from Nabil

Hopefully everything is correct!
I did prune the JOSS and editions parts of the template, I hope that is ok since they are not relevant for this review.

[isabelizimm]

Thank you kindly for this submission, @nabobalis 🙌 I also appreciate your preparedness beforehand going through our checklists!

Editor in Chief checks

Hi there! Thank you for submitting your package for pyOpenSci
review. Below are the basic checks that your package needs to pass
to begin our review. If some of these are missing, we will ask you
to work on them before the review process begins.

Please check our Python packaging guide for more information on the elements
below.

• Installation The package can be installed from a community repository such as PyPI (preferred), and/or a community channel on conda (e.g. conda-forge, bioconda).
  • The package imports properly into a standard Python environment import package.
• Fit The package meets criteria for fit and overlap.
• Documentation The package has sufficient online documentation to allow us to evaluate package function and scope without installing the package. This includes:
  • User-facing documentation that overviews how to install and start using the package.
  • Short tutorials that help a user understand how to use the package and what it can do for them.
  • API documentation (documentation for your code's functions, classes, methods and attributes): this includes clearly written docstrings with variables defined using a standard docstring format.
• Core GitHub repository Files
  • README The package has a README.md file with clear explanation of what the package does, instructions on how to install it, and a link to development instructions.
  • Contributing File The package has a CONTRIBUTING.md file that details how to install and contribute to the package.
  • Code of Conduct The package has a CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md file.
  • License The package has an OSI approved license.
    NOTE: We prefer that you have development instructions in your documentation too.
• Issue Submission Documentation All of the information is filled out in the YAML header of the issue (located at the top of the issue template).
• Automated tests Package has a testing suite and is tested via a Continuous Integration service.
• Repository The repository link resolves correctly.
• Package overlap The package doesn't entirely overlap with the functionality of other packages that have already been submitted to pyOpenSci.
• Archive (JOSS only, may be post-review): The repository DOI resolves correctly.
• Version (JOSS only, may be post-review): Does the release version given match the GitHub release (v1.0.0)?

---

• Initial onboarding survey was filled out
  We appreciate each maintainer of the package filling out this survey individually. 🙌
  Thank you authors in advance for setting aside five to ten minutes to do this. It truly helps our organization. 🙌

---

---

Editor comments

The link @sunpy/sunpy-developers shows as a 404 for me. My guess is it's a view that needs permissions. Is there an alternative list that is public you can link to?

EDIT: for reviewers, sunpy has CONTRIBUTING and CODE_OF_CONDUCT files at the org level. Since sunpy is not only a package, but also a community, this is a good setup for them to have the same standards across all their packages. For this reason, it is not necessary for these files to live in the root directory of the sunpy/sunpy repository that is under review.

Your editor for this review will be @cmarmo

[nabobalis]

Thank you @isabelizimm for pre-reviewing the submission.

Editor comments

The link @sunpy/sunpy-developers shows as a 404 for me. My guess is it's a view that needs permissions. Is there an alternative list that is public you can link to?

I will list the names in the original post as the team has not changed in a while.
I am surprised that it isn't public, I will see if I can get that fixed.

[cmarmo]

Hi @nabobalis, nice to meet you, and thanks for submitting to pyOpenSci!
I'm Chiara and I'm going to take care of the process as editor.
I'm looking for reviewers right now and hope to be back to you by the end of the next week.

[nabobalis]

Hi @cmarmo, thank you for handling this review!

That is no problem, it gives me a bit more time to check everything is ready on the sunpy side!

[cmarmo]

Hi @nabobalis, just to let you know that I have found one reviewer, still looking for a second one.
I hope to have some answers next week.
Thanks for your patience!

[cmarmo]

Hi @nabobalis,

thank you for your patience!

Let's welcome here @Septaris and @nutjob4life who kindly volunteered to review SunPy for pyOpenSci! 👋
Thank you both! Please take some time to introduce yourself here before starting the review.

Please fill out our pre-review survey

Before beginning your review, please fill out our pre-review survey. This helps us improve all aspects of our review and better understand our community. No personal data will be shared from this survey - it will only be used in an aggregated format by our Executive Director to improve our processes and programs.

• Sonny Lion survey completed.
• Sean Kelly survey completed.

The following resources will help you complete your review:

1. Here is the reviewers guide. This guide contains all of the steps and information needed to complete your review.
2. Here is the review template that you will need to fill out and submit here as a comment, once your review is complete.

I'm going to ask reviewers to complete reviews in three weeks, the review for SunPy is then due for December 13th, please let me know if you have any major issue preventing to meet this deadline.

Also, please get in touch with any questions or concerns!

Thanks again for your commitment! 🙏