Address feedback to improve the package

[colombe-tolokin]

No description provided.

[TinLattNandar]

Milestone 2

• Documentation does not follow a consistent style (@adrianl726 )
• One or more documentations are missing one or more required elements (title, argument, returned, example) - @TinLattNandar @colombe-tolokin @QuanhuaHuang-ubc @adrianl726
• Four of the functions don't have an example. @colombe-tolokin @QuanhuaHuang-ubc @adrianl726
• There is no documentation on how to run the test suite or the instructions are vague. @QuanhuaHuang-ubc

[TinLattNandar]

Feedback from Michael Suriawan

• Rename Package name (done by Adrian)
• Add explicit URL that points to your readthedocs page in the README @adrianl726
• Add typings in all functions (both definitions and README)@adrianl726
• Update extract_keyword function @TinLattNandar
• Add target audience in README @colombe-tolokin

Reminder:

• Thank and address reviewer @adrianl726

[QuanhuaHuang-ubc]

Peer Review Feedback from Le Phi Long Nguyen:

• Installation: Installation succeeds as documented.
• Performance: Any performance claims of the software been confirmed.
• In CONTRIBUTING.md the package name is still referred as textanalyzer instead of txtanalyzer @adrianl726
• still missing test docstrings @colombe-tolokin @TinLattNandar @QuanhuaHuang-ubc @adrianl726

Reminder:

• Thank and address reviewer @TinLattNandar

[adrianl726]

Feedback from Dominic:

• The introduction is somewhat redundant (the first two sentences repeat similar ideas), can be combined into one, i.e. "messageanalyzer is a powerful Python package designed for performing comprehensive..." @adrianl726
• The descriptions of the Usage section are good, but they don’t indicate return values clearly. @colombe-tolokin
• The second paragraph of the "Ecosystem Fit" section, refers to TextAnalyzer, which seems to be a naming inconsistency (probably should be messageanalyzer). @adrianl726
• “Check out the contributing guidelines” does not provide a link. Add a direct link to the contributing guide would be beneficial. @colombe-tolokin

Reminder:

• Thank and address reviewer @colombe-tolokin

[adrianl726]

Feedback from Lixuan Lin:

• The ci-cd workflow is not completely working now, I saw the cd job was skipped, which might be related to the semantic versioning not working properly. The semantic versioning only recognizes commit messages starting with keywords like "feat", "docs", "fix", etc. You can try this to run through the cd job. @adrianl726
• Continuous integration and test coverage badges are recommended to add per Daniel's suggestions, you can consider adding these two in the README. @adrianl726
• The docstring style of the functions is not consistent, some have the example section but some don't. (Same as ms2 feedback)
• The test py files don't have docstring inside, you can consider add some.
• I noticed a environment.yml file in the root directory, which includes many dependencies. This may cause conflicts with poetry. Only a python version would be enough here in this yml file. (remove yml) @QuanhuaHuang-ubc

Reminder:

• Thank and address reviewer @QuanhuaHuang-ubc

[QuanhuaHuang-ubc]

Peer Review Link: UBC-MDS/software-review-2025#24

[adrianl726]

Extra:

• Changelog: Manually fix the "Feedback addressed by reviewer" t o "Feedback addressed by team" @TinLattNandar