Joss paper review - Githubissues

samgdotson commented 7 months ago

The paper lives in paper/paper.md. I would appreciate a review before submitting to JOSS!

Details about the submission process may be found at joss.readthedocs.io.

Review criteria are available here.

The content guidelines are:

[ ] A list of the authors of the software and their affiliations, using the correct format (see the example below).
[ ] A summary describing the high-level functionality and purpose of the software for a diverse, non-specialist audience.
[ ] A Statement of need section that clearly illustrates the research purpose of the software and places it in the context of related work.
[ ] A list of key references, including to other software addressing related needs. Note that the references should include full names of venues, e.g., journals and conferences, not abbreviations only understood in the context of a specific discipline.
[ ] Mention (if applicable) a representative set of past or ongoing research projects using the software and recent scholarly publications enabled by it.
[ ] Acknowledgement of any financial support.

samgdotson commented 7 months ago

@munkm nudge?

samgdotson commented 6 months ago

@munkm nudge

samgdotson commented 6 months ago

@munkm nudge

samgdotson commented 6 months ago

@munkm If the lack of PDF is an obstacle, here is the PDF. Thanks! paper.pdf

samgdotson commented 6 months ago

@munkm nudge

pep8speaks commented 6 months ago

Hello @samgdotson! Thanks for updating this PR. We checked the lines you've touched for PEP 8 issues, and found:

In the file osier/models/capacity_expansion.py:

Line 53:80: E501 line too long (80 > 79 characters) Line 65:80: E501 line too long (80 > 79 characters)

Comment last updated at 2024-04-04 22:12:21 UTC

samgdotson commented 6 months ago

@munkm I addressed your comments and believe this is ready to merge. If this gets merged into main I will remove the CI command to compile the paper -- but for now it's helpful to see that it builds correctly.

samgdotson commented 6 months ago

@munkm here is the new pdf paper.pdf

samgdotson commented 6 months ago

Also, the PR ballooned because I pulled down the updates from arfc:main. This PR is being merged into arfc:joss which is not up-to-date with main. You can safely ignore any files that are not associated with the paper.

munkm commented 6 months ago

Thank you for the clarifications Sam. Looks great. Go ahead and submit!

arfc / osier

Joss paper review #51

Comment last updated at 2024-04-04 22:12:21 UTC