Development status

[felixbur]

Currently nkululeko still has alpha, but i wonder if it shouldn't be stable?

according to this website
these are the criteria:

4 - Beta ¶

Required properties: Software is feature complete
Typical steps: External testing, fixing bugs and performance problems. Usability testing.
Semantic version: 0.X.X
[PyPI](https://pypi.org/search/?q=&o=&c=Development+Status+%3A%3A+4+-+Beta): 10,000+ projects, including [pint](https://pypi.org/project/Pint/)

5 - Production/Stable ¶

Required properties: No major bugs known, tests cover the most important cases.
Typical steps: Fixing bugs, adding updates and new features.
Semantic version:

[felixbur]

because really most of what i do these days is implement new features

[bagustris]

Let's move to beta first and then to stable. Just list the current features, classifiers, visualization, data check and segmentation. If all features are working, we make it v1.0 (stable). Let's list it all in this issue.

Features

• os (opensmile)
• xbow
• mld (mid level descriptors)
• spectra
• trill
• wav2vec
• Hubert

Classifier/models

• MLP
• MLP Regressor
• SVM
• SVR
• XGB
• XGR
• CNN
• Finetuning

Visualization/plots

• TSNE
• epoch
• anim progression
• epoch progression
• best model
• Age (value_count)
• Gender (value_count)
• Duration (value_count)

Data check and segmentation

• filter
• check_vad
• check_size

Supported datasets

• androids
• cmu-mosei
• crema-d
• emodb
• emofilm
• emozionalmente
• iemocap
• jtes
• msp-improv
• msp-podcast
• ravdess
• others (clac, gerparas, etc.)

Data:

• balancing
• balancing_strategy (e.g., smote)

More augmentation:

• augment_types
• augment_targets

Testing:

• Unit test

Documentations:

• tutorials

Those are a lot of features, Felix! I think Nkululeko is now more than an alpha version! Once all is checked, we can mark the beta version (up to version 0.99) before the stable version (v.1.0)

[bagustris]

@felixbur
How about submitting Nkululeko to the Journal of Open-source Software (joss) before (or to obtain) the stable 1.0.0 version? Example of similar software is given in below link.

They, the reviewers, will check/review the quality of this repo (via issues, PR, etc). Once they accept Nkululeko (the paper), we should hit version 1.0.0.

openjournals/joss-reviews#4739

[felixbur]

sure, sounds good.
We should add a contributing section like this
https://github.com/SuperKogito/spafe/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md
as well

... and done

[felixbur]

Now also pushed initial versions of paper.md and paper.bib, so we can further work on it

[bagustris]

I moved paper.md and paper.bib to paper directory along with other stuff (assets, makefile, etc)

[bagustris]

I added a checklist for JOSS requirements below to track our progress.

• The software must be open source as per the OSI definition.
• The software must be hosted at a location where users can open issues and propose code changes without manual approval of (or payment for) accounts.
• The software must have an obvious research application.
• You must be a major contributor to the software you are submitting, and have a GitHub account to participate in the review process.
• Your paper must not focus on new research results accomplished with the software.
• Your paper (paper.md and BibTeX files, plus any figures) must be hosted in a Git-based repository together with your software.
• The paper may be in a short-lived branch which is never merged with the default, although if you do this, make sure this branch is created from the default so that it also includes the source code of your submission.
• Be stored in a repository that can be cloned without registration.
• Be stored in a repository that is browsable online without registration.
• Have an issue tracker that is readable without registration.
• Permit individuals to create issues/file tickets against your repository.

[felixbur]

i think it's all fine