---
tags: pyopensci, python
---
hackmd: https://hackmd.io/SnhLlLmgQlWIxcVWXpYsqQ?both

*this note has been pushed to github in our governance dir. If you update it please push it via hackmd here meeting-notes/2019-08-22-notes.md *

# pyOpenSci Meeting Notes - 22 August 2019

## Attendees
Leah Wasser (Earth Lab)
Chris H (at Pangeo conference but added notes below)
Luiz Irber
Mike Trizna
Max Joseph (Earth Lab)
Ivan Ogasawara (@xmnlab) Quansight
Tania Allard (Microsoft)
David Nicholson

## Agenda

1. Will anyone be at [pydata (New York)](https://pydata.org/nyc2019/)? @noamross had a few talk ideas but wanted to know if anyone from this team might be there. i will not. please let us know if you will be there!
* offer noam resources to help build his talk and include pyopensci??
1. Mechanisms to ensure the review process happens in a timely manner: How do we handle timing of things when people are busy? setup a chain of command where the person who may be overwhelmed with things on their plate, suggests alternative folks to step in?
* Maybe we can have something in writing for what happens when people don't have time to complete a review.
* If it's the maintainer -- maybe we don't give them deadlines??
* Tania -- Joss guidelines / expectations -- out of office bot??
* the bot will provide a message if you are not in the office... [editorial guide](https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/editing.html#expectations-on-joss-editors) . --
* let's check ropensci's timeline too?? https://devguide.ropensci.org/guide-for-authors.html
* editor respond within 5 business days
* reviewers -- within 3 weeks
* authors **respond** within 2 weeks
* Tania -- sometimes changes can take a long time! (8 months even) -- note this was an exceptionally long time for a submission
* luiz -- sometimes the maintainer might need support / help to implement changes - some mentorship might be required
3. getting caught up on items such as review that are behind (we have a few that are behind and a few new packages to discuss!!)
* [Erdapy (Filipe)](https://github.com/pyOpenSci/software-review/issues/1)
* Leah will followup with
* [Earthpy](https://github.com/pyOpenSci/software-review/issues/3)
* - Important: the clip module is moving to geopandas now!!! yay!
* luiz will followup to get the review going - be it with two new reviewers or one or if people have time they can do the review.
* [one new submission - pandera](https://github.com/pyOpenSci/software-review/issues/12) (cosmicbboy)
* max -- max is happy to implement the first review
* ivan -- ivan will followup --
* [one new pre-submission: pyBHL](https://github.com/pyOpenSci/software-review/issues/13)
* LUIZ: This is great!! because JOSS doesn't accept API wrappers
* David is happy to review when this is submitted!
6. funding for someone who can be a full time editor and community person

* FUNDING pyopensci (leah) -- [working draft of 2-3 pager]( https://docs.google.com/document/d/13S_HOGS89Zm1j257gC8Oja_Yol3j6xCp68Sr2Ln5MM0/edit)
> [name=Chris H] I can help w/ this in the coming weeks. Do we have an ongoing conversation with Moore on this, or has it been a while since we've discussed with them? I've heard Moore may be stepping back from funding some of this stuff, so we may need to explore other sources
> [name=Leah w] Sloan just approached me to review something so i'd be happy to explore both moore and sloan?? Tracy said moore might support this BUT that was ... gosh 6 months ago. maybe we can divide and conquer to decide??
>
* ropensci unconference -- could we find sponsors for this ?? (max) - microsoft, rstudio ...
* Tania -- microsoft reactors -- leah can email Tania -- san fransi
* https://developer.microsoft.com/en-us/reactor/

* Ivan is at quansight -- they might be able to support an unconference as well...

Next steps
* work on that overview document --
* add discsusion of unconference event and outcomes and what suppport we would need,
* what having 1-2 people full or part time would add to the effort..
* computational infrastructure, such as a GitHub pro level for organization, Zoom account etc. ??

8. wrap up items that were done / not done after the last meeting.
* adding contributors to our docs like jupyter has (chris??)

> [name=Chris H]I'm not sure where I put it, but I can't find my suggestion now. I'm wondering whether folks are interested in just using the [all contributors bot](https://allcontributors.org/docs/en/bot/installation) for this. It's a github bot that you can use to add people's images to the README (or the docs)

> [name=Leah Wasser] i've used the bot! it's really nice but my experience was it didn't support ``.Rst` for docs. Chris -- did you find a way around that?? i'm happy to consider using it as it works really well otherwise.

Does it work with markdown??

- Looks like it does based on the commit history of their repo's README.md file: https://github.com/all-contributors/all-contributors/blob/master/README.md

ISSUE HERE: https://github.com/pyOpenSci/pyopensci.github.io/issues/4

-- luiz can look into this!

* AGU?

> [name=Chris H] I'm around the Bay Area, so happy to stop by if I can be helpful for a session or something
>
### Next Steps

* Leah will followup on funding
* Tracy and/or Neil -- Moore
* Sloan (jeremy?)
* add to 2-3 pager text about the unconference event and what type of staff we'd like to have working on this

* Luiz will look into the all-contrbutors bot to use in our repo to track who's contributing.
* Luiz will look for two new (potentially) reviewers for earthpy or will checkin with reviewers aout it...
* We have two reviewers for pandera: max and ivan, leah will be the editor
* Followup on erdapy (leah can ping filipe)