I’d like to extend my congratulations to Ashley Kelly and Corentin Cadiou
for winning the innaugural NumFOCUS new contributor award!
This is a new award that honors new contributors to NumFOCUS projects. The
yt executive committee nominated Ashley and Corentin and they were both
recognized at the awards dinner on Sunday night after the sustainability
Let’s all give a warm round of emoji applause!
Ashley Kelly participated in Google Summer of Code this year with yt via
the NumFOCUS umbrella org. rom the outset, Ashley proposed a very ambitious
plan. Privately I felt that the plan was probably overambitious but with
the expectation that we would likely descope the plan, we decided to press
ahead wit the project. Not only did we not need to descope, In my opinion
Ashley exceeded his original plans. We are now in a much better position to
ship major new features next year thanks to Ashley’s efforts.
Corentin Cadiou began contributing to yt completely unprompted by any of
the core developers, working from Europe without in-person contact from the
bulk of the yt contributor base in the United States. Corentin has
substantially improved support for simulation data produced by the RAMSES
code, and has contributed a number of other bugfixes, performance
improvements, and nice new features. Corentin has doggedly made sure that
his code gets merged and regularly helps out new users on Slack and the
mailing list. Thanks to his efforts future RAMSES users and users of octree
AMR codes will have a much nicer experience with yt than when he began
Would this be useful?
Zoom is a video teleconference service. I’ve never used it and don’t know
if the call quality is better than google meet or hangouts.
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Andy Terrel <andy(a)numfocus.org>
Date: Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 8:44 PM
Subject: [NumFOCUS Projects] NumFOCUS Zoom Accounts
During the summit, one of the asks was to get a zoom account for projects.
I had a call with a zoom sales person today explaining who we are and why
they should support us. Unfortunately, they couldn't offer us a free
account, but they could give us a 25% discount.
The way it would work is we could create a @numfocus.com email address for
each project (something we should have anyways...) and then that address
could be tied to a zoom account. Folks could use that account for their
teleconferences but only one teleconference per account could be active at
any one time. So it would be up to the project to coordinate the usage of
this account. The accounts cost $200 per project that wishes to participate.
I propose we take this expense to the board to include in next year's
budget. Please let me know if you would like a zoom account.
Andy R. Terrel, PhD
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Fiscally Sponsored Project Representatives" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to projects+unsubscribe(a)numfocus.org.
To post to this group, send email to projects(a)numfocus.org.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/a/numfocus.org/group/projects/
To view this discussion on the web visit
This seems worth doing. I can reach out to the astropy people about setting
this up for yt. Do others think this would be worthwhile?
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Marten van Kerkwijk <m.h.vankerkwijk(a)gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 1:36 PM
Subject: Re: [Numpy-discussion] PR Cleanup
To: Discussion of Numerical Python <numpy-discussion(a)python.org>
Over at astropy we have a bot that sends a warning to PRs that have not
received any commits for 5 months  and closes them if nothing happens in
the next month, asking to open an issue instead. Despite my apprehensions,
I found this worked quite well, drawing back attention to forgotten PRs
(and forcing one to consider if they best remain forgotten).
Would there be interest in such a scheme?
All the best,
p.s. We don't do anything with issues.
 Text of the astropy-bot warning:
Hi humans [image: wave] - this pull request hasn't had any new commits for
approximately 5 months. *I plan to close this in a month if the pull
request doesn't have any new commits by then.*
In lieu of a stalled pull request, please consider closing this and open an
issue instead if a reminder is needed to revisit in the future. Maintainers
may also choose to add keep-open label to keep this PR open but it is
discouraged unless absolutely necessary.
If this PR still needs to be reviewed, as an author, you can rebase it to
reset the clock. You may also consider sending a reminder e-mail about it
to the astropy-dev mailing list <http://groups.google.com/group/astropy-dev>
*If you believe I commented on this pull request incorrectly, please report
this here <https://github.com/astropy/astropy-bot/issues>.*
NumPy-Discussion mailing list
Concurrent with the upcoming release of yt 3.5, we plan to do the inaugural
stable release of the yt_astro_analysis package. If you're unaware,
yt_astro_analysis is a standalone package representing most of what was
previously in yt/analysis_modules. Here are some relevant links:
As a separate package, I think yt_astro_analysis should have its own
citable apart from yt for people to reference in their papers. As an
example, the unyt <https://github.com/yt-project/unyt> package is
associated with a paper in the Journal of Open Source Software. A simple
solution for yt_astro_analysis is to create an entry on zenodo.org. Here is
an example of one of those that I made for ytree
<https://zenodo.org/record/1405101#.W5wYu_5Kjxs>. If you go there, you'll
see that there is a record of all stable releases and instructions for how
to cite in paper. Another nice thing is that the author list can be
So, I would like to do this for yt_astro_analysis. In my opinion, the
benefit is additional opportunities for people to get credit for their yt
contributions while the only potential downside is that it could take away
citations from yt itself. I don't really see that happening, and I think we
can ensure it by providing specific language for how to cite that would say
something about citing both packages.
If people are in favor of this, then the other thing that needs to be
decided is the author list. I'm open to many options, but below is my
suggestion. Please, comment on this if you have opinions.
- Everyone who has made commits to the yt_astro_analysis repo (the history
includes everything done when this code was in yt) is automatically
included and can choose to opt-out. I've include this list of contributors
at the bottom of this email.
- Anyone else in the yt community who feels they contributed to this
package in some way that isn't recognized by the list of committers can
contact me and put their name forward. I don't even need a reason, we can
just be maximally inclusive.
- The author list is just names or perhaps starts with "The yt Project"
and then names. The order is set by number of commits (I know this isn't
perfect) or perhaps the top few contributors and then alpha-order. This
would put me first, but as the person who has done most of the work to
advance this project, I think it's reasonable.
Ok, that's it. I would really like to hear thoughts on this, including "we
should not have a separate citable for yt_astro_analysis", if that's how
328 Britton Smith
245 Matthew Turk
177 John ZuHone
126 Nathan Goldbaum
81 Stephen Skory
43 Andrew Myers
37 Cameron Hummels
36 Kacper Kowalik
35 Christopher Moody
33 Hilary Egan
32 Sam Skillman
12 Mike Warren
10 John Wise
10 Geoffrey So
9 Douglas Rudd
8 Joshua Moloney
4 Pengfei Chen
4 Sam Leitner
3 Anthony Scopatz
3 Miguel de Val-Borro
2 Michael Kuhlen
2 Casey W. Stark
1 Matthew Krafczyk
1 Mark Richardson
1 Stephanie Tonnesen
1 Bili Dong
1 BW Keller
I just went through and triaged the unmilestoned issues. We're at 27 issues
now that are marked for yt 3.5.
I've created a google meet event (like hangout but with a much higher
participant limit) for the hangout here:
I'll be on the call starting at 9:00 AM central time on Thursday. Once we
have a quorum we can go through the issues, identify who wants to work on
what, and start hacking.
If you'd like to participate but are nervous about the time commitment, you
definitely don't need to be there the entire time. Any help at all is very
much appreciated. I will also be around for low-latency help if you need it.
Hopefully by the end of this we will either be ready to cut a release or
failing that we will have a much better idea what actually needs to get
done. I know that several other people expressed interest in helping out
but couldn't do this week, so I may decide to also schedule a day or two
next week to finish things off and hopefully not delay yt 3.5 even more.
Thanks for your help!