Merge pull request #357 from pyOpenSci/volume

enh(policy): Add discussion about submission volume

Author: eliotwrobson

how-to/author-guide.md

@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ We review packages openly using GitHub Issues.
 ::::
 
 ::::{grid-item}
-:::{card}  <i class="fa-solid fa-timeline"></i> Review timeline
+:::{card} <i class="fa-solid fa-timeline"></i> Review timeline
 :link: ../our-process/review-timeline
 :link-type: doc
 :class-card: left-aligned
@@ -118,6 +118,15 @@ for pyOpenSci.
   as we also want to ensure that everyone working on the project receives full credit
   for their effort.
 
+```{note}
+**Important**: To ensure quality reviews for all submissions and protect our
+volunteer review team, each active submission must have a unique point of contact.
+If you are currently the point of contact for another package under review, please
+wait until that review is complete before submitting another package.
+
+For more details, see our [submission volume policy](submission-volume).
+```
+
 ```{note}
 If your package is more of a tool to support a specific workflow that
 either:
@@ -141,8 +150,8 @@ If you have questions about any of the elements listed below, you can
 check out our [pyOpenSci Python packaging guide](https://www.pyopensci.org/python-package-guide) which includes an overview discussion of best practices
 for Python packaging, including discussions of:
 
-- Tools that you can use to create your package
-- Tools for creating and publishing documentation.
+- Tools that you can use to create your package,
+- Tools for creating and publishing documentation,
 - Resources for creating files such as the README file, code of conduct, contributing guide, and more.
 
 ```{include} ../appendices/editor-in-chief-checks.md
@@ -259,7 +268,7 @@ default if the package fits into the JOSS scope.
 
 - When you submit your package for pyOpenSci review, you can opt to include a
   submission to JOSS after passing pyOpenSci review. In this case, your package
-  will be evaluated by JOSS through the pyOpenSci review
+  will be evaluated by JOSS through the pyOpenSci review.
 - To complete the JOSS submission, you will also need to craft a **paper.md**
   file describing the package following JOSS' standards (see below). More details on the requirements for JOSS can be found on [their website](https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/submitting.html#what-should-my-paper-contain).
 - If you choose to opt into the pyOpenSci/JOSS partnership in your review,

our-process/policies.md

@@ -27,6 +27,39 @@ When submitting a package, please make sure that your GitHub notification
 settings are turned on for the software-submission repository to notify you
 when you receive feedback on a review issue.
 
+(submission-volume)=
+
+## Submission volume and maintainer overlap
+
+To protect our volunteer peer review team and ensure quality reviews for all
+packages, we have policies regarding the volume of simultaneous submissions.
+
+### Unique point of contact requirement
+
+Each submission to pyOpenSci should have one point of contact per package.
+Each person listed as a point of contact may have only one submission under
+review at a time.
+
+This policy ensures that:
+
+- Review feedback receives appropriate attention from maintainers.
+- Maintainers don't become overwhelmed managing multiple concurrent reviews.
+- Our volunteer reviewers and editors can focus their efforts effectively.
+
+### Multiple submissions with overlapping maintainer teams
+
+If multiple packages are submitted simultaneously with overlapping maintainer
+teams, we will evaluate our volunteer reviewer capacity and may request
+staggered submissions to ensure quality review for all packages and to protect
+the time and availability of our volunteer editorial team.
+
+We recognize that some situations may warrant exceptions to these guidelines.
+For example, two closely related packages that would benefit from review by
+the same editorial team may be handled together. All policies may have
+exceptions under the discretion of the editors, and decisions will be made by
+the Editor-in-Chief based on reviewer capacity and the specific circumstances
+of the submission.
+
 ## Submitting your package for review in other venues
 
 We recommend submitting your package for review with pyOpenSci before