-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 36
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Pynteny: a Python package to perform synteny-aware, profile HMM-based searches in sequence databases #67
Comments
Thank you @Robaina for submitting Pynteny to pyOpenSci. As you noted, we have already discussed on #65 and you have done extensive development to prepare for submission. Here are the initial editor checks:
Editor commentsThe author has done a ton of work to get ready for submission. Pynteny is looking really good. We will need a contributing.md before the review finishes but that's the only thing I really see missing right now. Thank you again @Robaina. |
Hi @NickleDave, thanks for accepting the submission! I have included a "CONTRIBUTING.md" in the root directory of the repo, also moved instructions on how to set a developer environment to that file. Looking forward to the review process -- Btw, I think I did fill out the initial onboarding survey, please confirm. Best, |
Perfect, thank you Semidán! Following up on my last message: we do expect to get review started within the next two weeks. People are off-line because of the holidays but we will get the ball rolling now. |
Dear @Robaina, nice to meet you! I just wanted to say hi 👋🏼 and inform you that I am pleased to be the editor for this review. |
Hi @arianesasso, nice to meet you too! Awesome. Thanks for letting me know and for being the editor. Looking forward to the review! (und guten Rutsch ins neue Jahr) |
Dear Robaina, I hope you had a great start to the year as well! I am sorry for the delay. We are still looking for our second reviewer. However, I would like to introduce you to @Batalex, who is already on the job as the first reviewer 😄 . We have previously talked about the package, and he already has access to the reviewer's guide, the reviewer template, and the Python packaging standards detailed in the packaging guide. So, we will be able to continue moving 🚀 . And please feel free to ping me at any time if you need help or have questions! |
Hi @arianesasso, no problem, thanks for the update :) Hi @Batalex, thanks the review! |
Hey there! I am almost done with my review. No promises, but I think I can deliver this weekend. |
Here comes a big one! @Robaina @arianesasso ForewordI want to thank both the author and the editors from pyOpenSci for the opportunity to tackle this package review. The following comments reflect my experience as I maintain private packages, and all remarks come with pynteny's best interest at heart. Some comments are regrouped at a "general" level if they concern the project structure or several files. If I encountered a situation that I had already pointed out on another file, I did not comment again. However, I encourage taking into account the remarks from one file to the others. Several comments I made are only valid for the submitted version (0.0.5) and were fixed in the meantime. Nonetheless, I will mark off what has been done later. With that being said, let us get started! I used the black cat🐈⬛ to highlight my personal thoughts in the review template below. Package ReviewPlease check off boxes as applicable, and elaborate in comments below. Your review is not limited to these topics, as described in the reviewer guide
DocumentationThe package includes all the following forms of documentation:
🐈⬛ The submitted version uses a personal conda channel in README, which is something I would not recommend. However, it uses bioconda in the main branch, so it is all good.
🐈⬛ There are some improvements to be made regarding running the examples locally, see below.
🐈⬛ In Pynteny 0.0.5, contributions guidelines are included in the README file. A more detailed CONTRIBUTING file has been added since then.
🐈⬛ I noticed that two of the three links to the Pynteny repo use the HTTP scheme, and the third uses HTTPS. Readme file requirements
The README should include, from top to bottom:
🐈⬛ Additional badges have been added since the 0.0.5 release. NOTE: If the README has many more badges, you might want to consider using a table for badges: see this example. Such a table should be more wide than high. (Note that the a badge for pyOpenSci peer-review will be provided upon acceptance.)
UsabilityReviewers are encouraged to submit suggestions (or pull requests) that will improve the usability of the package as a whole.
🐈⬛ I ran the package in WSL since Apple silicon is not supported. The installation went smoothly, except for the really long resolution time. I am glad to see that the main branch encourages to use mamba. Functionality
🐈⬛ As far as I can tell, it seems to do what it claims.
🐈⬛ NA, no performance claim to be found in the documentation.
🐈⬛ Tests covers 45% of pynteny. The coverage is heterogenous: the application and CLI parts of the package are less tested than the rest.
🐈⬛ Unit tests did not run on CI as of 0.0.5. This has changed since then. The documentation website is built and deployed using CI, nice!
🐈⬛ The code base does not fully follow PEP 8. See below for more information. For packages also submitting to JOSS
Note: Be sure to check this carefully, as JOSS's submission requirements and scope differ from pyOpenSci's in terms of what types of packages are accepted. The package contains a
Final approval (post-review)
Estimated hours spent reviewing: ~8 hours Review Comments 🐈⬛General comments:
CLI
Edits
|
Hey @Batalex , thanks so much for your very detailed review! I quickly run through your comments and I see that they will be very useful. I'll address them carefully in the following days. But wanted to thank you now. |
Hi @arianesasso, great, thanks for letting me know. Hi @c-thoben, thanks for offering to review! |
Hey @Robaina, if you would like, I can free some time in case you want a reviewer for your upcoming PRs on Pynteny. This may be a little easier to discuss the suggested changes. |
Hi @Batalex , thanks for the offer! Will do that for the ones I'm currently working on. |
Thank you @Batalex. Likewise, you far exceeded my expectations in your review. Incredibly supportive and collaborative. From now on using |
Thank you so much for your time and great review @c-thoben, and for helping me identify and solve Pynteny's installation problems! |
ok next steps! |
Pynteny is now a part of the pyOpenSci Ecosystem!🎉 Pynteny has been approved by pyOpenSci! Thank you @Robaina for submitting pyteny and many thanks to @Batalex @c-thoben for reviewing this package! 😸 NOTE: I have to say this was an extraordinary review over all. @NickleDave you also really did a wonderful job in getting this review together early on. All aspects of this review went exactly as i would hope a pyOpenSci review would go!! We want our reviews to be a conversation that supports maintainers in improving their package! And i really think this was achieved here. So thank you ALL for being a tremendous team in this review. There are a few things left to do to wrap up this submission after you've taken the post review survey! Author Tasks@Robaina please do the following:
Editor Tasks
🎉 Congratulations! You are now published with both JOSS and pyOpenSci! 🎉 All -- if you have any feedback for us about the review process please feel free to share it here. We are always looking to improve our process and documentation in the software-peer-review-guide. We have also been updating our documentation to improve the process, so all feedback is appreciated! |
I couldn't determine any contributions to add, did you specify any contributions? I've put up a pull request to add @ALL! 🎉 I've put up a pull request to add @badge! 🎉 I've put up a pull request to add @Robaina! 🎉 I've put up a pull request to add @Package! 🎉 I couldn't determine any contributions to add, did you specify any contributions? Could not find the user |
Weird, seems like the all-contribs bot got triggered even though we didn't tag it? I closed all these PRs except for the one that added @Robaina which I went ahead and merged. The reviewers will still need to be added. |
It was really easy to work with @Robaina who has been really responsive to feedback and who has now evolved |
woah -- i just saw that. i guess i will have to link to instructions in our guide book 🙈 sorry y'all! i didn't think the bot worked like that |
Thank you so much for your help during the pre-review @NickleDave! |
Thank you so much you all! I think I have completed all the required checks from my side. Please, review my PR to include Pynteny in the database. Not sure I completed the fields correctly. As a final note. I have to say that I have enjoyed this review process. You have been tremendously supportive. Feedback has been always constructive to better the package. I wished these kinds of open reviews were the norm in Science... |
It is really great to know you enjoyed the process! I think we all did 😄 . Please read their paper.md file requirements, and make sure that the paper is in your repo. Then, follow the instructions here: submitting the package to JOSS. Now, you don't need to go through another review 🙂 : You should just tag the JOSS issue with our issue. |
Great! will check paper format and submit it in the following days. Thank you @arianesasso ! |
Hi @arianesasso, just to inform you that Pynteny has been published in JOSS. Thank you! |
Closing this now that we're pyOS-approved and joss-approved! Great review y'all |
Submitting Author: Semidán Robaina (@Robaina)
All current maintainers: @Robaina
Package Name: Pynteny
One-Line Description of Package: Query sequence database by HMMs arranged in predefined synteny structure
Repository Link: https://github.com/Robaina/Pynteny
Version submitted: v0.0.5
Editor: @arianesasso
Reviewer 1: @Batalex
Reviewer 2: @c-thoben
Archive:
JOSS DOI:
Version accepted: 1.0.0
Date accepted (month-day-year): 03-10-2023
Description
Pynteny is Python tool to search for synteny blocks in (prokaryotic) sequence data through HMMs of the ORFs of interest and HMMER. By leveraging genomic context information, Pynteny can be employed to decrease the uncertainty of functional annotation of unlabelled sequence data due to the effect of paralogs. Pynteny can be accessed (i) through the command line, (ii) as a Python module, or (iii) as a (locally served) web application.
Scope
For all submissions, explain how and why the package falls under the categories you indicated above. In your explanation, please address the following points (briefly, 1-2 sentences for each):
Explain how and why the package falls under these categories (briefly, 1-2 sentences). Please note any areas you are unsure of:
Pynteny's main objective is to provide a means to query NGS (unannotated) sequence databases, such as metagenomic/metatranscriptomic datasets using syntenic blocks (i.e. spatial arrangements of genes) rather than single target genes/protein domains. In this sense, I would classify Pynteny within Data Extraction.
Pynteny was designed to be used by researchers working with large, unannotated sequence databases, such as those typically encountered in metagenomic analyses. It can be accessed through a command line interface or easily integrated into pipelines as a Python package. Pynteny can also be used through a graphical interface running locally in the browser, which is more suitable for educational purposes.
To the extent of my knowledge, there isn't any Python package that provides the functionality provided by Pynteny.
@tag
the editor you contacted: Pynteny: a Python package to perform synteny-aware, profile HMM-based searches in sequence databases #65Technical checks
For details about the pyOpenSci packaging requirements, see our packaging guide. Confirm each of the following by checking the box. This package:
Publication options
I had submitted this package for publication at JOSS prior to pyOpenSci. The submission is currently under consideration for scope in this issue: openjournals/joss-reviews#4978
JOSS Checks
paper.md
matching JOSS's requirements with a high-level description in the package root or ininst/
.Note: Do not submit your package separately to JOSS
Are you OK with Reviewers Submitting Issues and/or pull requests to your Repo Directly?
This option will allow reviewers to open smaller issues that can then be linked to PR's rather than submitting a more dense text-based review. It will also allow you to demonstrate addressing the issue via PR links.
Code of conduct
Please fill out our survey
submissions and improve our peer review process. We will also ask our reviewers
and editors to fill this out.
P.S. *Have feedback/comments about our review process? Leave a comment here
Editor and Review Templates
[Editor and review templates can be found here]: https://www.pyopensci.org/software-peer-review/how-to/editors-guide.html and https://www.pyopensci.org/software-peer-review/how-to/reviewer-guide.html
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: