Closed whedon closed 3 years ago
Hello human, I'm @whedon, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks. @ziatdinovmax, @macrocosme it looks like you're currently assigned to review this paper :tada:.
: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.
:star: Important :star:
If you haven't already, you should seriously consider unsubscribing from GitHub notifications for this (https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews) repository. As a reviewer, you're probably currently watching this repository which means for GitHub's default behaviour you will receive notifications (emails) for all reviews 😿
To fix this do the following two things:
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
PDF failed to compile for issue #2481 with the following error:
Can't find any papers to compile :-(
@whedon generate pdf from branch joss-submission
Attempting PDF compilation from custom branch joss-submission. Reticulating splines etc...
@99991 @gkthiruvathukal First of all, I would like to congratulate the authors on their clean and useful software. The code is well documented, includes tests, and benchmarks. The code was easily installable, and examples ran as expected (except for a few path issues that have now been fixed). Instructions on how to set and run the benchmarks have also been simple to follow and worked as expected. I have a few minor comments regarding the submission.
Regarding the community guidelines criteria:
I would like to ask the authors to apply these changes, after which I will accept this submission.
@macrocosme Thank you for your quick turnaround and helpful comments for @99991.
I will await feedback from @ziatdinovmax, who may need a bit more time.
Thanks for the fast review and the helpful comments, @macrocosme! We really appreciate this.
Regarding your minor comments:
@whedon generate pdf from branch joss-submission
Attempting PDF compilation from custom branch joss-submission. Reticulating splines etc...
@99991 @gkthiruvathukal My apologies for the delay in responding... Congrats to the authors on their very nice library! It installs and runs smoothly, and the documentation is in good order. The only minor comment that I have is about the paper. When I was reading it, I kept wondering (perhaps out of my ignorance) who is the target audience and what specific applications the method can be used for. The statement at the beginning of the paper that it is “important for many image editing tasks” seems to be a bit vague. Perhaps listing several potential applications e.g. in the field of scientific and/or medical imaging together with references will be helpful.
Dear ziatdinovmax, thank you very much for your review!
There is a vast number of fields where alpha matting can be applied. The landmark paper [1] by Levin et al. alone has over 2000 citations. Although there are some applications of alpha matting in medical imaging, e.g. [2], [3], [4], we would argue that the problem solved by our toolbox is more of a fundamental problem that arises in image processing. The target audience of our toolbox therefore are researchers of image processing and computer vision. We hope that out toolbox makes alpha matting research more comparable and reproducible.
Of course, we would add references to applications of alpha matting if you insist.
@99991, thanks for the excellent follow up. I think adding these applications would be helpful.
@ziatdinovmax, does @99991's follow up address your concern about audience?
@gkthiruvathukal Yes, it does.
@ziatdinovmax Thanks!
@99991 Please go ahead and make the revisions you proposed for including proper references. Then I think we can move toward acceptance. (I will post a final checklist of things we need to do, once your article is updated.)
@ziatdinovmax @gkthiruvathukal thank you for your fast responses! We added the references to the paper and included the statement about the target audience in the first section of the paper.
We also made some further changes to the first section and the formatting of the references.
@whedon generate pdf from branch joss-submission
Attempting PDF compilation from custom branch joss-submission. Reticulating splines etc...
@99991 and @tuelwer It seems like we're moving closer. If you're done, and our reviewers @ziatdinovmax and @macrocosme are satisfied, I can post the final checklist.
@whedon generate pdf from branch joss-submission
Attempting PDF compilation from custom branch joss-submission. Reticulating splines etc...
@gkthiruvathukal We are ready. :+1:
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
@gkthiruvathukal Is there anything we can do at the moment?
👋 @gkthiruvathukal - it looks like this is ready for you to "@whedon accept" and then pass on?
@danielskatz Thanks for the gentle nudge!
@99991 I'm ready to move forward with acceptance. There are a few final checks:
@gkthiruvathukal We created a tagged release of our package. The version number is 1.0.7 and the Zenodo DOI is 10.5281/zenodo.4081416
.
@whedon commands
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
# All commands can be run on a non-default branch, to do this pass a custom
# branch name by following the command with `from branch custom-branch-name`.
# For example:
# 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
@whedon set v1.0.7 as version
OK. v1.0.7 is the version.
@whedon set 10.5281/zenodo.4081416 as archive
OK. 10.5281/zenodo.4081416 is the archive.
@openjournals/joss-eics Ok, we're all set to move forward with accepting this JOSS submission.
@gkthiruvathukal - the next step is for you to do a @whedon accept
and make sure everything looks good, then tell @openjournals/joss-eics
Thanks, @danielskatz. I think we're ready to go here! I am still classically conditioned to my "early days" of JOSS where I wasn't doing the whedon accept.
@whedon accept
Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...
PDF failed to compile for issue #2481 with the following error:
Can't find any papers to compile :-(
@openjournals/joss-eics I've recommended accept. Oddly, there is a problem with the paper, even though it has successfully been built recently in this issue thread.
@gkthiruvathukal I think you have to add from branch joss-submission
. 👍
Thank you, @tuelwer! The problem is that the paper build was triggered by the whedon accept, which defaults to the main branch, it seems. I'm pretty sure your paper is building fine but can do it again.
@whedon generate pdf from branch joss-submission
Attempting PDF compilation from custom branch joss-submission. Reticulating splines etc...
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
I suppose you even can do a @whedon accept from branch joss-submission
, but I do not know if it makes a difference.
@whedon accept from branch joss-submission
Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...
Submitting author: @99991 (Thomas Germer) Repository: https://github.com/pymatting/pymatting Version: v1.0.7 Editor: @gkthiruvathukal Reviewer: @ziatdinovmax, @macrocosme Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.4081416
: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.
Status
Status badge code:
Reviewers and authors:
Please avoid lengthy details of difficulties in the review thread. Instead, please create a new issue in the target repository and link to those issues (especially acceptance-blockers) by leaving comments in the review thread below. (For completists: if the target issue tracker is also on GitHub, linking the review thread in the issue or vice versa will create corresponding breadcrumb trails in the link target.)
Reviewer instructions & questions
@ziatdinovmax & @macrocosme, please carry out your review in this issue by updating the checklist below. If you cannot edit the checklist please:
The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @gkthiruvathukal know.
✨ Please start on your review when you are able, and be sure to complete your review in the next six weeks, at the very latest ✨
Review checklist for @ziatdinovmax
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
Review checklist for @macrocosme
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper