search

astropy / astropy-project

Documents and policies regarding the Astropy Project as a whole.
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
36 stars 43 forks source link

Cycle 4: Cosmology #394

Closed nstarman closed 6 months ago

mhvk commented 8 months ago

This seems a nice idea, but a possible worry is that it will be very hard to find a suitable person - who has to be good at cosmology as well as at coding - since otherwise supervision will take nearly as much time as doing the work.

nstarman commented 8 months ago

Hi @mhvk, thanks for the comment. I've updated the proposal to better explain why the software engineer doesn't actually need a deep understanding of Cosmology, just a good ability to distill API from the structures of codes. This is really more of a time-to-review + structural analysis task that happens to be on a Cosmology subject.

kelle commented 7 months ago

Consider adding a minimum budget.

eteq commented 7 months ago

Please react to this comment to vote on this proposal (👍, 👎, or no reaction for +0)

nstarman commented 7 months ago

Consider adding a minimum budget.

Thanks! Added.

pllim commented 7 months ago

I feel like an APE is needed first before this can happen.

Also, how does this play with other "unified API" campaigns out there? Example:

nstarman commented 7 months ago

I feel like an APE is needed first before this can happen.

For which part of the proposal?

Also, how does this play with other "unified API" campaigns out there? Example:

It plays very nicely! When Quantity can support other array types, then it's a goal for Cosmology to support all the same types. This shouldn't be difficult and made easier with the proposed architecture.

pllim commented 7 months ago

implement the The Cosmology API

Seems like this is a very significant change and should require APE?

nstarman commented 7 months ago

implement the The Cosmology API

Seems like this is a very significant change and should require APE?

Essentially 100% backwards compatible. More a thoughtful re-org and cleanup of the components. Some functions gain an optional second argument. All functions work better with Quantities.

AnaGabela commented 6 months ago

Hi Nathaniel,

I'm writing on behalf of Astropy's Finance Committee regarding the outcome of your recent Funding Request.

We are sorry to report that your proposal could not be funded during this funding Cycle. We will be closing the FR as a result.

While the community vote was the primary driver of this, it is important to note that this likely does not reflect anything about you as a member of the Astropy Community. Rather, it reflects the specific balance of projects proposed this cycle, the available funds, and the priorities of this cycle’s funding sources relative to others.

We encourage you to read feedback in the thread above or other feedback you might have received via other means, and consider an FR for the next cycle with whatever modifications you think would help. You are also welcome to reach out to the Finance Committee for feedback if you would like.

Ana- on behalf of the Astropy Finance Committee