David Nicholson

Thinking out loud: I guess most tools are pretty consistent about how they save so it would have to be someone working with the exported annotations that corrupts the files....

Hi @ralphpeterson -- sorry I haven't been able to get you an answer sooner. Here's an initial answer, I will come back and edit this a little more. > Do...

Agreed, good idea. Changed the issue title and will put this on the to-do list. Thank you @ralphpeterson

Hi @labarba I'm happy to review. I see the intro references pyOpenSci and py-pkgs.org -- I wonder if @lwasser @tomasbeuzen @ttimbers have ideas for potential reviewers (apologies for tagging you...

+1 for adopting similar language to ROpenSci Sharing the link here that you provided @lwasser just in case it helps provide context: https://devguide.ropensci.org/guide-for-authors.html They have it as a set of...

Right, my initial reaction is that if we were to adopt similar criteria then pyGMT would be appropriate to review at this time, because - [x] At the submission stage,...

Yes exactly! That's what I was just about to write :)

The question of which version to review came up here too: https://github.com/pyOpenSci/software-submission/issues/84#issuecomment-1491465856 My understanding is we want the metadata to capture the exact version at time of submission. - [...

In the spirit of having an open discussion here, I want to add a link to the Command-Line Interface Guidelines that @pradyun helpfully shared in the pyOpenSci Slack, specifically the...

:+1: for changing the first sentence to something like ``` Your package must avoid collecting usage analytics without informing people using it. ```