pyOpenSci / software-submission

Submit your package for review by pyOpenSci here! If you have questions please post them here: https://pyopensci.discourse.group/
92 stars 36 forks source link

automata #152

Closed eliotwrobson closed 1 month ago

eliotwrobson commented 8 months ago

Submitting Author: Eliot Robson (@eliotwrobson) All current maintainers: (@eliotwrobson, @caleb531) Package Name: automata One-Line Description of Package: A Python library for simulating finite automata, pushdown automata, and Turing machines. Repository Link: https://github.com/caleb531/automata Version submitted: v8.2.0 EiC: @isabelizimm Editor: @sneakers-the-rat
Reviewers: @phildong , @irisdyoung, @NimaSarajpoor Reviews Expected By: March 28th, 2024 Archive: DOI Version accepted: 8.4.0 (repo, pypi, archive) Date accepted (month/day/year): 06/29/2024


Code of Conduct & Commitment to Maintain Package

Description

Automata is a Python 3 library implementing structures and algorithms for manipulating finite automata, pushdown automata, and Turing machines. The algorithms have been optimized and are capable of processing large inputs. Visualization logic has also been implemented.

Scope

Domain Specific & Community Partnerships

- [ ] Geospatial
- [x] Education
- [ ] Pangeo

Community Partnerships

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

[^1]: Please fill out a pre-submission inquiry before submitting a data visualization package.

This package is suitable for both researchers wishing to manipulate automata and for instructors teaching courses on theoretical computer science. Automata (especially finite automata) are important models in computing that appear in a variety of educational and research contexts, and the ability to manipulate them with this package is valuable to this effort.

There are some smaller packages with similar scope (for example here), but automata is the most popular, best maintained, and most feature-rich.

https://github.com/pyOpenSci/software-submission/issues/135

Although I am not the primary repository owner (that is @caleb531), he has given me permission to make this submission and be a long-term point of contact as-needed. Additionally, our documentation page is brand-new, so we anticipate some rough edges, and hope that feedback from this review can be used to improve the usability and add examples. Automata also already appeared in JOSS, so that is why those items have been left blank here even though the writeup is present in the repository.

Technical checks

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

Publication Options

JOSS Checks - [ ] The package has an **obvious research application** according to JOSS's definition in their [submission requirements][JossSubmissionRequirements]. 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][JossSubmissionRequirements]: "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][JossPaperRequirements] with a high-level description in the package root or in `inst/`. - [ ] The package is deposited in a long-term repository with the DOI: *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.

Confirm each of the following by checking the box.

Please fill out our survey

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.

sneakers-the-rat commented 2 months ago

yes, also asked about that & how to format/submit/etc. I would assume it would be a jekyll-markdown style post like those in https://github.com/pyOpenSci/pyopensci.github.io/tree/main/_posts

when i get further info i'll let you know (and also update our docs, bc they are unclear to authors and editors alike at the moment ;)

irisdyoung commented 2 months ago

hey everybody, sorry for dropping the ball. Glad to see you got the review process wrapped up -- thanks @NimaSarajpoor for stepping in!! And to the authors/maintainers, nice piece of work, glad it's out there!

eliotwrobson commented 1 month ago

@sneakers-the-rat the package is now listed on the site, and the blog post has been merged and is live. Can this issue be closed?

lwasser commented 1 month ago

oh yes. thank you for your patience @eliotwrobson and for being so on top of things. let's close this puppy as completed! i see you filled out the survey - many many thanks for the feedback!! 👐🏻