pfsspy to sunkit-magex

[nabobalis]

Do we need to review or can we rename the package and go from there?

[Cadair]

I would suggest we mark pfsspy as dead, and review magex. I feel like we should go though the process even if it's own own package with minimal new code. (we want to look like we are doing things properly here).

[nabobalis]

Then we should get someone to review it.

[Cadair]

Ok, this shouldn't be hard, and I haven't actually written it so here is the review for magex:

Package Details

• Package name: sunkit-magex
• Maintainer(s): The SunPy Project
• Repository: https://github.com/sunpy/sunkit-magex
• Documentation link: https://docs.sunpy.org/projects/sunkit-magex/
• PyPI link (if applicable): https://pypi.org/project/sunkit-magex/
• Continuous integration link(s): https://github.com/sunpy/sunkit-magex/actions
• Link to Code of Conduct or page describing adopted Code of Conduct: https://github.com/sunpy/sunkit-magex/tree/v1.0.0rc1?tab=coc-ov-file#readme

Description of Package

A magnetic field extrapolation package spun out of pfsspy.

Package Review

Editor Submission Checklist

• [x] Is the submission appropriate (compatible with the SunPy CoC)?
• [x] Does the project have an appropriate license?
• [x] Is the project in an online version control system?
• [x] Does the project provide a Python interface?
• [x] Is the project on PyPI?
• [x] Is the project useful to the solar physics community?
• [x] Version that was reviewed (tag or commit hash) 1.0.0(rc1)

[Cadair]

• Functionality :
• Integration :
• Documentation :
• Testing :
• Duplication :
• Community :
• Development Status :