Martini

[kyleaoman]

Submitting Author: Kyle Oman (@kyleaoman)
All current maintainers: (@kyleaoman)
Package Name: martini
One-Line Description of Package: MARTINI is a modular package for the creation of synthetic resolved HI line observations (data cubes) of smoothed-particle hydrodynamics simulations of galaxies.
Repository Link: https://github.com/kyleaoman/martini
Version submitted: 2.0.11 (note JOSS paper is in branch joss-paper, and that branch is somewhat behind main & 2.0.11)
EiC: @isabelizimm
Editor: @hamogu
Reviewer 1: @taldcroft
Reviewer 2: @MicheleDelliVeneri
Archive: https://zenodo.org/doi/10.5281/zenodo.11193206
JOSS DOI: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.06860
Version accepted: 2.0.15
Date accepted (month/day/year): 06/03/2024

---

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

MARTINI is a modular package for the creation of synthetic resolved HI line observations (data cubes) of smoothed-particle hydrodynamics simulations of galaxies. The various aspects of the mock-observing process are divided logically into sub-modules handling the data cube, source, beam, noise, spectral model and SPH kernel. MARTINI is object-oriented: each sub-module provides a class (or classes) which can be configured as desired. For most sub-modules, base classes are provided to allow for straightforward customization. Instances of each sub-module class are given as parameters to the Martini class; a mock observation is then constructed by calling a handful of functions to execute the desired steps in the mock-observing process.

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 visualization¹
  • Workflow automation
  • Citation management and bibliometrics
  • Scientific software wrappers
  • Database interoperability

Domain Specific

• Geospatial
• Education

Community Partnerships

If your package is associated with an
existing community please check below:

• Astropy: Link coming soon to standards
• Pangeo: My package adheres to the Pangeo standards listed in the pyOpenSci peer review guidebook

• For all submissions, explain how the and why the package falls under the categories you indicated above. In your explanation, please address the following points (briefly, 1-2 sentences for each):

  • Who is the target audience and what are scientific applications of this package?

The target audience is research astronomers interested in galaxies (broadly, "extragalactic astronomers") from both the theoretical and observational communities. The package provides a way to transform data products from the theory community (smoothed-particle hydrodynamics based simulations of galaxy formation and evolution) into data products closely resembling the atomic hydrogen signal observed with a radio telescope at 21-cm wavelengths. This enables much more faithful comparisons between theoretical predictions and measurements.

• Are there other Python packages that accomplish the same thing? If so, how does yours differ?

I am not aware of any other actively maintained packages with similar purpose.

• If you made a pre-submission enquiry, please paste the link to the corresponding issue, forum post, or other discussion, or @tag the editor you contacted:

N/A (I had previously submitted to astropy under their affiliated package scheme and have been redirected here)

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.
• 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.

Publication Options

• Do you wish to automatically submit to the Journal of Open Source Software? If so:

JOSS Checks

• The package has an obvious research application according to JOSS's definition in their submission requirements. Be aware that completing the pyOpenSci review process does not guarantee acceptance to JOSS. Be sure to read their submission requirements (linked above) if you are interested in submitting to JOSS.
• The package is not a "minor utility" as defined by JOSS's submission requirements: "Minor ‘utility’ packages, including ‘thin’ API clients, are not acceptable." pyOpenSci welcomes these packages under "Data Retrieval", but JOSS has slightly different criteria.
• The package contains a paper.md matching JOSS's requirements with a high-level description in the package root or in inst/.
• The package is deposited in a long-term repository with the DOI: https://zenodo.org/doi/10.5281/zenodo.11193206

Since I'm coming in through the new astropy route, I had not prepared for JOSS requirements, but was thinking of submitting to JOSS soon anyway. I've now pushed a paper.md in the joss-paper branch. My package is indexed in the ASCL which in turn is indexed in ADS, but neither of these seems to provide an actual DOI so I will need to look into other repositories (probably Zenodo). As far as I understand submission to JOSS happens after the pyOpenSci review so there is a little bit of time to get this done - I expect to have these two items ticked off by the time the pyOpenSci review process is completed.

Note: JOSS accepts our review as theirs. You will NOT need to go through another full review. JOSS will only review your paper.md file. Be sure to link to this pyOpenSci issue when a JOSS issue is opened for your package. Also be sure to tell the JOSS editor that this is a pyOpenSci reviewed package once you reach this step.

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.

Footnotes

1. Please fill out a pre-submission inquiry before submitting a data visualization package. ↩

[isabelizimm]

Hello there! Just letting you know we have seen this issue and will be following up with pre-review checks shortly!

[isabelizimm]

Thank you so much for this submission! It's so exciting to see these astropy submissions roll in ☄️

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

In your README can you add a quick installation piece? It doesn't have to be too fancy, something like the # Installation section on the rdata package would be perfect. In the meantime, I'll sort out finding an editor for this review 🙌

Also, are you able to to add a "version submitted"? I'm assuming it is the latest, but we'll want to know what version the review started at. It's okay if there are releases during the review/the accepted version is different, that is expected as you make edits!

[isabelizimm]

Also, we have an editor lined up; @hamogu will be the editor lined up for this review 🙌

[kyleaoman]

@isabelizimm I added the version submitted. Not sure what you're requesting for the installation information in README - there's a paragraph there already so if something else/different is needed I'm not sure what it is. Or do you not mean the package README?