On your manuscript, for this text:
DataBallPy has shown to be increasingly used by coders, practitioners, and researchers. The package has been downloaded over 47.000 times on PyPI, averaging more than 250 downloads per week.
I do not think average downloads on PyPI is a measure of popularity for a project, since these downloads count are highly biased: https://packaging.python.org/en/latest/guides/analyzing-pypi-package-downloads/
Consequently, PyPI stopped displaying download statistics. I would suggest removing this sentence from the manuscript since it does not scientifically show if the software is good or bad, or even popular or not.
openjournals/joss-reviews#10223
On your manuscript, for this text:
DataBallPy has shown to be increasingly used by coders, practitioners, and researchers. The package has been downloaded over 47.000 times on PyPI, averaging more than 250 downloads per week.
I do not think average downloads on PyPI is a measure of popularity for a project, since these downloads count are highly biased: https://packaging.python.org/en/latest/guides/analyzing-pypi-package-downloads/
Consequently, PyPI stopped displaying download statistics. I would suggest removing this sentence from the manuscript since it does not scientifically show if the software is good or bad, or even popular or not.
openjournals/joss-reviews#10223