[PRE REVIEW]: GRLC - the Git Repository Linked data api Constructor

[whedon]

Submitting author: @c-martinez (Carlos Martinez-Ortiz) Repository: https://github.com/CLARIAH/grlc Version: v1.3.4 Editor: @lorenanicole Reviewers: @essepuntato, @alexdma Managing EiC: Arfon Smith

:warning: JOSS reduced service mode :warning:

Due to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, JOSS is currently operating in a "reduced service mode". You can read more about what that means in our blog post.

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @c-martinez. Currently, there isn't an JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@c-martinez if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). In addition, this list of people have already agreed to review for JOSS and may be suitable for this submission (please start at the bottom of the list).

Editor instructions

The JOSS submission bot @whedon is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @whedon can do for you type:

@whedon commands

[whedon]

Hello human, I'm @whedon, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.

:warning: JOSS reduced service mode :warning:

Due to the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, JOSS is currently operating in a "reduced service mode". You can read more about what that means in our blog post.

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@whedon commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Software report (experimental):

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.84  T=0.09 s (521.2 files/s, 50074.4 lines/s)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                      files          blank        comment           code
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                           22            464            363           1749
Markdown                          4            132              0            380
HTML                              2             33              9            155
CSS                               1             28             32            135
JavaScript                        2             13             31            123
Bourne Shell                      6             22             31            116
TeX                               1              4              0             86
Bourne Again Shell                2             14             15             75
YAML                              3              3              4             56
Dockerfile                        1             13              1             36
JSON                              2              0              0             35
Jupyter Notebook                  1              0            419             20
INI                               1              2              0             13
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                             48            728            905           2979
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistical information for the repository '2220' was gathered on 2020/05/22.
The following historical commit information, by author, was found:

Author                     Commits    Insertions      Deletions    % of changes
Albert Merono                    2             7              2            0.01
Albert Meronyo                   3            96             41            0.09
Albert Meronyo-Penyu            15         35839            114           22.58
Albert Meroño-Peñuel           111          3692           1244            3.10
Albert Meroño-Peǹuel             2           118             15            0.08
Carlos                          21           488            119            0.38
Carlos Martinez                 92         40063          76510           73.21
Hoekstra, Rinke (ELS             5            35             15            0.03
Jonas                            1             1              1            0.00
Pasquale Lisena                 11           369            143            0.32
Rinke Hoekstra                  16           238             49            0.18
RoderickvanderWeerdt             2             2              2            0.00
mwigham                          1            10             20            0.02

Below are the number of rows from each author that have survived and are still
intact in the current revision:

Author                     Rows      Stability          Age       % in comments
Albert Meroño-Peñuel        592           16.0         29.1               19.09
Carlos Martinez            1831            4.6         17.3               10.70
Hoekstra, Rinke (ELS         21           60.0         26.8                9.52
Pasquale Lisena             243           65.9         14.5               14.40
mwigham                       3           30.0         12.0                0.00

[whedon]

Reference check summary:

OK DOIs

- 10.18174/505685 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30796-7_28 may be missing for title: Easy Web API Development with SPARQL Transformer
- https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47602-5_48 may be missing for title: grlc Makes GitHub Taste Like Linked Data APIs
- https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70407-4_27 may be missing for title: SPARQL2Git: Transparent SPARQL and Linked Data API Curation via Git
- https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68204-4_30 may be missing for title: Automatic Query-Centric API for Routine Access to Linked Data

INVALID DOIs

- None

[whedon]

:point_right: Check article proof :page_facing_up: :point_left:

[arfon]

:wave: @c-martinez. Thanks for your submission to JOSS. As described in our blog post announcing the reopening of JOSS, we're currently working in a "reduced service mode", limiting the number of papers assigned to any individual editor.

Since reopening JOSS earlier in the week we've had > 50 papers submitted and as such, yours has been put in our backlog that we will be working through over the coming weeks and months.

Thanks in advance for your patience!

[danielskatz]

👋 @lorenanicole - would you be able to edit this submission?

[danielskatz]

@whedon invite @lorenanicole as editor

[whedon]

@lorenanicole has been invited to edit this submission.

[lorenanicole]

@whedon assign me as editor

[whedon]

OK, the editor is @lorenanicole

[lorenanicole]

@c-martinez, do you have any suggestions for reviewers for your submission for JOSS?

We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html

[albertmeronyo]

Hi @lorenanicole , we think Jan Wielemaker (https://github.com/JanWielemaker) and Silvio Peroni (https://github.com/essepuntato) would be good choices

[lorenanicole]

Excellent, thank you @albertmeronyo!

[lorenanicole]

Greetings @JanWielemaker @essepuntato! Would you be willing to review this submission for JOSS?

We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines 👉 https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html.

[lorenanicole]

@JanWielemaker @essepuntato just wanted to check in to see if there was anything further you may need?

Greetings @JanWielemaker @essepuntato! Would you be willing to review this submission for JOSS?

We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines 👉 https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html.

[essepuntato]

@JanWielemaker @essepuntato just wanted to check in to see if there was anything further you may need?

Hi @lorenanicole, apologies – I'm just back from holidays right now. I'll work on it as soon as possible. Would it be possible for me to work on it next week or it is too late?

Have a nice day :-)

[lorenanicole]

@essepuntato not too late at all! Just wanted to circle back in case we needed to find another editor. Thank you for following up! This comment will be of use to you 👇 https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/2220#issuecomment-641390482

[lorenanicole]

@whedon invite @essepuntato as reviewer

[whedon]

I'm sorry human, I don't understand that. You can see what commands I support by typing:

@whedon commands

[lorenanicole]

@whedon commands

[whedon]

Here are some things you can ask me to do:

# List all of Whedon's capabilities
@whedon commands

# Assign a GitHub user as the sole reviewer of this submission
@whedon assign @username as reviewer

# Add a GitHub user to the reviewers of this submission
@whedon add @username as reviewer

# Re-invite a reviewer (if they can't update checklists)
@whedon re-invite @username as reviewer

# Remove a GitHub user from the reviewers of this submission
@whedon remove @username as reviewer

# List of editor GitHub usernames
@whedon list editors

# List of reviewers together with programming language preferences and domain expertise
@whedon list reviewers

# Change editorial assignment
@whedon assign @username as editor

# Set the software archive DOI at the top of the issue e.g.
@whedon set 10.0000/zenodo.00000 as archive

# Set the software version at the top of the issue e.g.
@whedon set v1.0.1 as version

# Open the review issue
@whedon start review

EDITORIAL TASKS

# Compile the paper
@whedon generate pdf

# Compile the paper from alternative branch
@whedon generate pdf from branch custom-branch-name

# Remind an author or reviewer to return to a review after a
# certain period of time (supported units days and weeks)
@whedon remind @reviewer in 2 weeks

# Ask Whedon to do a  dry run of accepting the paper and depositing with Crossref
@whedon accept

# Ask Whedon to check the references for missing DOIs
@whedon check references

# Ask Whedon to check repository statistics for the submitted software
@whedon check repository

EiC TASKS

# Invite an editor to edit a submission (sending them an email)
@whedon invite @editor as editor

# Reject a paper
@whedon reject

# Withdraw a paper
@whedon withdraw

# Ask Whedon to actually accept the paper and deposit with Crossref
@whedon accept deposit=true

[lorenanicole]

@whedon add @essepuntato as reviewer

[whedon]

OK, @essepuntato is now a reviewer

[lorenanicole]

Just waiting to see if @JanWielemaker is able to review!

[lorenanicole]

@albertmeronyo 👋 ! Do you had another reviewer recommendation? It appears @JanWielemaker may not have bandwidth to be a reviewer.

[c-martinez]

@lorenanicole :wave: -- Perhaps Jonathan Blaney (https://github.com/jonathanblaney) might be a good candidate?

[essepuntato]

@essepuntato not too late at all! Just wanted to circle back in case we needed to find another editor. Thank you for following up! This comment will be of use to you 👇 #2220 (comment)

Hi @lorenanicole

it seems I forgot to formally accept the invitation by whedon and it expired. Could you please sent it again?

[lorenanicole]

@whedon add @essepuntato as reviewer

[whedon]

OK, @essepuntato is now a reviewer

[lorenanicole]

@essepuntato can you let me know if this works?

[lorenanicole]

Hi 👋 @jonathanblaney, would you be willing to review this submission for JOSS?

We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines 👉 https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html

[essepuntato]

It worked thanks!

S.

Il giorno 26 giu 2020, alle ore 19:23, Lorena Mesa notifications@github.com ha scritto:

 @essepuntato can you let me know if this works?

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

[jonathanblaney]

@lorenanicole I don't think I'm the right person but am looking into other candidates, if that's OK with you?

[jonathanblaney]

Hi again @lorenanicole. I've asked around and @alexdma is prepared to review this.

[lorenanicole]

@jonathanblaney thanks for the additional reviewer.

[lorenanicole]

Hi @alexdma, circling back! would you be willing to review this submission for JOSS?

We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html!

[alexdma]

Hi @lorenanicole - yes, sorry for the delay in getting back to you, but I still do not quite understand where and how I am supposed to write my review. Do I have to open an issue here, comment on this one or... what? And where do I go to issue commands to whedon? The guidelines all seem to assume that I already am at the place where the review should be entered.

[labarba]

hi 👋 – @lorenanicole: it looks like the reviewer needs some guidance here. Can you pop in to help?

@openjournals/dev – can you check why a reviewer is listed twice on the header comment? Should this be edited manually?

[xuanxu]

can you check why a reviewer is listed twice on the header comment? Should this be edited manually?

He was added twice (in june 17th and 26th). I have edited it manually.

[lorenanicole]

@alexdma We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines 👉 https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. If you can please confirm, after reviewing these guidelines, that you are prepared to be a reviewer I can move us to the next step. We will open a separate issue for review.

[lorenanicole]

@alexdma We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines 👉 https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. If you can please confirm, after reviewing these guidelines, that you are prepared to be a reviewer I can move us to the next step. We will open a separate issue for review.

Greetings @alexdma just checking in to see if you needed help with the above?

[alexdma]

@lorenanicole thanks, but much as I may go over the guidelines, I cannot find in them the answer to my fundamental question.

Where do I find the review page with the checklist that I have to fill?

Here? I don't see the space to enter the review On a new issue of this project? If I try to open one here, I get an automated message saying I must not create issues here. I open an issue on the main GRLC repository? I have searched older issues there, and none of them seems to be a review.

So... where is the space for me to enter my review?

Thanks

[lorenanicole]

@alexdma your review will have on a separate GitHub issues upon confirming your intent to review, basically all I need is a "yes I will review" from you. Then we'll (as in I will) use our JOSS tooling to open the review issue for your work to start! An example of a review issue is here: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/2727.

Does that help answer your question?

[alexdma]

I see. Yes, of course I will review: I had assumed my intent was known since I had originally confirmed it by email, and was stuck looking for the place to get started. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[lorenanicole]

No worries whatsoever @alexdma! I appreciate the prompt feedback!

[lorenanicole]

@whedon add @alexdma as reviewer

[whedon]

OK, @alexdma is now a reviewer

[lorenanicole]

@whedon start review

[whedon]

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/2731.

[lorenanicole]

OK, I've started the review over in #2731.

Yay! @alexdma @essepuntato we are as the above states ☝️ moving review over to #2731. @c-martinez we'll be in touch as needed.