Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
docs: update PSF scicookie report (#12)
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
* docs: update PSF scicookie report

* fix typos

* Update scicookie/psf-grant-report-2024-01.md

Co-authored-by: Anavelyz Perez <42752529+Anavelyz@users.noreply.github.com>

* Update scicookie/psf-grant-report-2024-01.md

Co-authored-by: Anavelyz Perez <42752529+Anavelyz@users.noreply.github.com>

* Update scicookie/psf-grant-report-2024-01.md

Co-authored-by: Anavelyz Perez <42752529+Anavelyz@users.noreply.github.com>

* fix errors pointed by prettier

* Update scicookie/psf-grant-report-2024-01.md

* fix typos

---------

Co-authored-by: Anavelyz Perez <42752529+Anavelyz@users.noreply.github.com>
  • Loading branch information
EverVino and Anavelyz authored Jul 3, 2024
1 parent 1203e2d commit bdb3c02
Showing 1 changed file with 19 additions and 9 deletions.
28 changes: 19 additions & 9 deletions scicookie/psf-grant-report-2024-01.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -128,8 +128,9 @@ Below are the responses to the event report submitted to PSF.
In general, Anavelyz and Yurely were in charge of resolving the issues. Ever
Vino was in charge of coordinating the timing and checking any blockages
during the execution of the project, he also helped the participants with some
of their doubts. Ivan Ogasawara was the one responsible for reviewing and
approving the issues, as well as the suggestions and the path of wisdom.
of their doubts. Ivan was responsible for improving the SciCookie structure,
which helped a lot to solve the issues, he was also in charge of reviewing and
approving the issues.

- Participant Feedback _Did the people that attend have anything to say_ Thanks
to PSF for the grant we received, it has allowed us to acquire new knowledge
Expand All @@ -139,13 +140,22 @@ Below are the responses to the event report submitted to PSF.
- Retrospective _Discuss what worked out well and what you would change for the
next time if there is anything planned._

We are pleased to report an 80% success rate in implementing the grant. This
opportunity has been invaluable in addressing identified areas for improvement
within SciCookie, resulting in substantial progress.

However, we encountered a challenge with the absence of a peer review process
from PyOpenSci for tools like SciCookie. We are actively collaborating with
them to explore establishing a review standard in the near future.
We are happy and grateful to have met most of the milestones presented in the
grant proposal. Regarding the milestone referred to "Apply to PyOpenSci" we
have found some details that we did not take into consideration, one of them
was that SciCookie is considered a tool and not a library (package) and we do
not fit into its package scope either, despite this we make sure to comply
with the quality requirements (tests, CI configuration, documentation), we
have also initiated communications with
[Leah Wasser](https://github.com/lwasser), Executive Director of pyOpenSci,
who has directly reviewed the use of SciCookie for pyOpenSci's needs as a
project template to recommend to its community . Based on her reviews and
suggestions, SciCookie has been improved to meet her main expectations. Leah
has also started creating a profile (default configuration set) specific to
pyOpenSci at [SciCookie](https://github.com/osl-incubator/scicookie/pull/273).
Due to her priorities and schedule, this work is still in progress. We have
learned that it is necessary to pay special attention to milestones and do a
double check when there are milestones that involve third parties.

- General Feedback _Anything else you want to say that didn't fit in anywhere
else?_
Expand Down

0 comments on commit bdb3c02

Please sign in to comment.