From 67b2290d3fd022cab896e56c4b21bf03544c917a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Eliot Robson Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2025 01:43:04 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 1/3] Add discussion about submission volume --- how-to/author-guide.md | 11 ++++++++++- our-process/policies.md | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/how-to/author-guide.md b/how-to/author-guide.md index 72f40491..a0828006 100644 --- a/how-to/author-guide.md +++ b/how-to/author-guide.md @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ We review packages openly using GitHub Issues. :::: ::::{grid-item} -:::{card} Review timeline +:::{card} Review timeline :link: ../our-process/review-timeline :link-type: doc :class-card: left-aligned @@ -117,6 +117,15 @@ for pyOpenSci. as we also want to ensure that everyone working on the project receives full credit for their effort. +```{note} +**Important**: To ensure quality reviews for all submissions and protect our +volunteer review team, each active submission must have a unique point of contact. +If you are currently the point of contact for another package under review, please +wait until that review is complete before submitting another package. + +For more details, see our [submission volume policy](../our-process/policies.html#submission-volume-and-maintainer-overlap). +``` + ```{note} If your package is more of a tool to support a specific workflow that either: diff --git a/our-process/policies.md b/our-process/policies.md index 1ade5fa4..83708aca 100644 --- a/our-process/policies.md +++ b/our-process/policies.md @@ -26,6 +26,38 @@ needed. When submitting a package, please make sure that your GitHub notification settings are setup to notify you when you receive feedback on the review issue. +## Submission volume and maintainer overlap + +To protect our volunteer peer review team and ensure quality reviews for all +packages, we have policies regarding the volume of simultaneous submissions. + +### Unique point of contact requirement + +Each submission to pyOpenSci should have one unique point of contact per package. +At any given time, all points of contact across all active submissions (those +under review) should be unique. + +This policy ensures that: + +- Review feedback receives appropriate attention from maintainers +- Maintainers don't become overwhelmed managing multiple concurrent reviews +- Our volunteer reviewers and editors can focus their efforts effectively + +### Multiple submissions with overlapping maintainer teams + +If multiple packages are submitted simultaneously with overlapping maintainer +teams, we will evaluate our volunteer reviewer capacity and may request +staggered submissions to ensure quality review for all packages and to protect +the time and availability of our volunteer editorial team. + +### Edge cases and exceptions + +We recognize that some situations may warrant exceptions to these guidelines. +For example, two closely related packages that would benefit from review by +the same editorial team may be handled together. We will evaluate edge cases +to this policy as they arise, and decisions will be made by the Editor-in-Chief +based on reviewer capacity and the specific circumstances of the submission. + ## Submitting your package for review in other venues We recommend submitting your package for review with pyOpenSci before From 781cbf9f28fc60415a380777fb39f3b11a06af1f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Eliot Robson Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2025 00:54:38 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 2/3] Changes based on comments --- how-to/author-guide.md | 2 +- our-process/policies.md | 23 ++++++++++++----------- 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) diff --git a/how-to/author-guide.md b/how-to/author-guide.md index a0828006..122bd9b2 100644 --- a/how-to/author-guide.md +++ b/how-to/author-guide.md @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ volunteer review team, each active submission must have a unique point of contac If you are currently the point of contact for another package under review, please wait until that review is complete before submitting another package. -For more details, see our [submission volume policy](../our-process/policies.html#submission-volume-and-maintainer-overlap). +For more details, see our [submission volume policy](submission-volume). ``` ```{note} diff --git a/our-process/policies.md b/our-process/policies.md index 83708aca..ab835c52 100644 --- a/our-process/policies.md +++ b/our-process/policies.md @@ -26,6 +26,8 @@ needed. When submitting a package, please make sure that your GitHub notification settings are setup to notify you when you receive feedback on the review issue. +(submission-volume)= + ## Submission volume and maintainer overlap To protect our volunteer peer review team and ensure quality reviews for all @@ -33,15 +35,15 @@ packages, we have policies regarding the volume of simultaneous submissions. ### Unique point of contact requirement -Each submission to pyOpenSci should have one unique point of contact per package. -At any given time, all points of contact across all active submissions (those -under review) should be unique. +Each submission to pyOpenSci should have one point of contact per package. +Each person listed as a point of contact may have only one submission under +review at a time. This policy ensures that: -- Review feedback receives appropriate attention from maintainers -- Maintainers don't become overwhelmed managing multiple concurrent reviews -- Our volunteer reviewers and editors can focus their efforts effectively +- Review feedback receives appropriate attention from maintainers. +- Maintainers don't become overwhelmed managing multiple concurrent reviews. +- Our volunteer reviewers and editors can focus their efforts effectively. ### Multiple submissions with overlapping maintainer teams @@ -50,13 +52,12 @@ teams, we will evaluate our volunteer reviewer capacity and may request staggered submissions to ensure quality review for all packages and to protect the time and availability of our volunteer editorial team. -### Edge cases and exceptions - We recognize that some situations may warrant exceptions to these guidelines. For example, two closely related packages that would benefit from review by -the same editorial team may be handled together. We will evaluate edge cases -to this policy as they arise, and decisions will be made by the Editor-in-Chief -based on reviewer capacity and the specific circumstances of the submission. +the same editorial team may be handled together. All policies may have +exceptions under the discretion of the editors, and decisions will be made by +the Editor-in-Chief based on reviewer capacity and the specific circumstances +of the submission. ## Submitting your package for review in other venues From 1b2be0477c2e95d5bd10abcdc1261ea33392148b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Eliot Robson Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2025 00:57:08 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 3/3] Update author-guide.md --- how-to/author-guide.md | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/how-to/author-guide.md b/how-to/author-guide.md index 122bd9b2..a8e7301b 100644 --- a/how-to/author-guide.md +++ b/how-to/author-guide.md @@ -149,8 +149,8 @@ If you have questions about any of the elements listed below, you can check out our [pyOpenSci Python packaging guide](https://www.pyopensci.org/python-package-guide) which includes an overview discussion of best practices for Python packaging, including discussions of: -- Tools that you can use to create your package -- Tools for creating and publishing documentation. +- Tools that you can use to create your package, +- Tools for creating and publishing documentation, - Resources for creating files such as the README file, code of conduct, contributing guide, and more. ```{include} ../appendices/editor-in-chief-checks.md @@ -262,7 +262,7 @@ default if the package fits into the JOSS scope. - When you submit your package for pyOpenSci review, you can opt to include a submission to JOSS after passing pyOpenSci review. In this case, your package - will be evaluated by JOSS through the pyOpenSci review + will be evaluated by JOSS through the pyOpenSci review. - To complete the JOSS submission, you will also need to craft a **paper.md** file describing the package following JOSS' standards (see below). More details on the requirements for JOSS can be found on [their website](https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/submitting.html#what-should-my-paper-contain). - If you choose to opt into the pyOpenSci/JOSS partnership in your review,