Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Responses to pyOpenSci review #842

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Sep 20, 2024
Merged

Conversation

matteobachetti
Copy link
Member

@matteobachetti matteobachetti commented Sep 9, 2024

This is to address the comments at
pyOpenSci/software-submission#201

The big change here is that we fully move the configuration to pyproject.toml. This removes some of the inconsistencies coming from having half of the configuration in setup.cfg.
In turn, this allows some goodies like having an automatic badge for the compatible Python version, which was one of the requests from the pyOpenSci review.
The rest of changes are rather minor and mostly involve clarifications in the docs.
One bugfix in crosscorrelation.py to solve #845 (note that I reproduced the failing line, now working, in test_crosscorrelation.py).

Resolve #846
Resolve #841
Resolve #839
Resolve #845

Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 9, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.39%. Comparing base (241f81a) to head (db79270).
Report is 35 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #842      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   96.53%   96.39%   -0.14%     
==========================================
  Files          48       48              
  Lines        9257     9292      +35     
==========================================
+ Hits         8936     8957      +21     
- Misses        321      335      +14     
Flag Coverage Δ
78.92% <100.00%> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

@@ -271,6 +272,9 @@ the stingray source directory.
Using Stingray
===============

The documentation below is built on top of Jupyter notebooks that can be run locally.
The easiest way to retrieve the notebooks is by `cloning the notebooks repository <https://github.com/StingraySoftware/notebooks>`_ and browsing the directories, which are conveniently divided by topic.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@taldcroft Is this addition in the right direction for what you were asking?

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sounds good, thanks.

{ name = "Stingray Developers", email = "[email protected]" }
]
license = { text = "MIT" }
requires-python = ">=3.8"
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@masonng-astro @taldcroft I added all these metadata to the pyproject.toml file, including the supported Python versions and a contact (a Google Group which is admittedly underused but an easy way to contact us).
The python version encoded here is picked up by the badge in the README

|Docs|, |joss|, |Repo status|, " "
|License|, |doi|, |Coverage Status Master|, " "


Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@masonng-astro @taldcroft Here are the new badges, including the repo status from repostatus.org and the supported Python versions, as requested

@@ -125,6 +124,8 @@ For the Gaussian Process modeling in `stingray.modeling.gpmodeling`, you'll need
+ etils
+ typing_extensions

For the Bexvar calculations in `stingray.bexvar` and `stingray.lightcurve`, you'll need `UltraNest <https://johannesbuchner.github.io/UltraNest/index.html>`_.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@masonng-astro here is the Ultranest line

Copy link

@taldcroft taldcroft left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks good from the perspective of the pyOpenSci review issues. Obviously all the packaging, infrastructure and minor code changes need review by a stingray maintainer. Once this is merged I'll update my pyOpenSci review and accept.

Copy link
Member

@dhuppenkothen dhuppenkothen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This all looks good to me! 👍

README.rst Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@matteobachetti matteobachetti added this pull request to the merge queue Sep 20, 2024
Merged via the queue into main with commit c3e6dd3 Sep 20, 2024
16 of 17 checks passed
@matteobachetti matteobachetti deleted the pyOpensci-review-responses branch September 20, 2024 15:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
3 participants