v1.0.0 cutoff

[Melissari1997]

Hey @brendancol

From the README I see that the project is working toward its first major release, and now the focus is mostly on features stabilization, bug fixing and other details.
I was wondering if you have a rough idea of what features are needed for the release of version 1.0.0, and if possible, to get an idea of where we are on the roadmap

Thanks!

[brendancol]

@Melissari1997 Great question and I'm hoping to box the effort to get the release out.

The rough plan is:

1. No new tools or subtools until after 1.0.0 - basically just to limit to what is there now...basically what is in the README.md feature matrix, but there may be some undocumented dark corners to add or drop from that feature matrix, but things already in the codebase...no new high-level modules.
2. Each public function / function group is free of CRITICAL and HIGH category bug as discovered by the .claude/commands/deep-sweep.md which is a composite command that runs each of the "sweep-{}" commands on a specified area of the codebase. The most important two areas for me are accuracy and security, then performance, api-consistency and documentation. Some of the issues you've been responding to were generated during a deep-sweep of the contours module for example. The deep sweeps are not deterministic and different models find different things, so Ive been using various models to do the deep sweep, but primarily Opus 4.x and gpt 5.5. As new models come out, deep sweeps should be re-ran across the codebase to find new issues and vulnerabilities.
3. Each public function / function group has a decent notebook examples, and potentially a stand alone python script example.
4. We ("xarray-spatial contributors") like the high-level spellings in the API and feel they are worthy of LTS

In terms of dividing this up to finish faster, I'm thinking it would be great if different maintainers essentially "owned" a module, at least until 1.0.0 release. For example, if you wanted to continue running deep-sweeps, or other ways to bring the contours module to "production" ready, that would be ideal. I'm especially concerned about the geotiff module because the "blast radius" is so large if there is a bug there. I've gone through dozens of deep-sweeps using Opus 4.6, Opus 4.7, and Opus 4.8 and now am only see MEDIUM and LOW categories issues. When I ask codex to scan the geotiff module, it continues to find inconsistencies and backend parity issues which I've been triaging.

My day is about over here, but happy to chat more and would love to do a 1.0.0 release planning session if youre interested.

Hope all is great with you and thanks for your participation over the past week