enh(policy): Add discussion of package length #358
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think these changes were made by an autoformatter? Either way, everything in here looks good and should probably add markdown formatting checks to CI.
|
|
||
| ### Package size and scholarly effort | ||
|
|
||
| PyOpenSci reviews packages that represent substantial scholarly effort and provide |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| PyOpenSci reviews packages that represent substantial scholarly effort and provide | |
| pyOpenSci reviews packages that represent substantial scholarly effort and provide |
| The final decision on whether a package represents sufficient scholarly effort | ||
| rests with the editor and will be made on a case-by-case basis. | ||
|
|
||
| ```{note} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| ```{note} | |
| :::{note} |
just for consistency as we use colon fences throughout (works either way tho!)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@lwasser I think this was changed on save with the autoformatter I was using. Is there a way to have colon fences enforced through autoformatting?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@eliotwrobson what are you using here on save? I think either we need a consistent linter for markdown or turn off linting on save-- otherwise this will keep happening every commit/PR
| Our more flexible approach allows us to support useful scientific packages | ||
| that may be outside JOSS scope while maintaining our partnership for | ||
| packages that meet both organizations' criteria. | ||
| ``` |
| ```{note} | ||
| **Relationship to JOSS requirements:** | ||
| The Journal of Open Source Software (JOSS) requires packages to have at least |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's also link to JOSS policies here for "validation" .
| standards. This approach reduces the burden of a full review while ensuring the quality of the package | ||
| reflects its most recent version. | ||
|
|
||
| ```{note} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| ```{note} | |
| :::{note} |
| but does not meet JOSS requirements (e.g., minimum lines of code), it will not be | ||
| eligible for JOSS fast-track review. See our [package scope guidelines](../about/package-scope.html#package-size-and-scholarly-effort) | ||
| for more details. | ||
| ``` |
| (coi)= | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
probably an autoformat thing here too. i think targets work with a line space but i'm not sure!
| minimum line count, we expect packages to demonstrate sufficient complexity and | ||
| functionality to warrant a comprehensive peer review. | ||
|
|
||
| **General expectations:** |
Summarized discussion in #351 and should be appropriate for closing the issue. Written using gen ai for summarizing.