[REVIEW]: Windrose

[whedon]

Submitting author: @scls19fr (Sébastien Celles) Repository: https://github.com/python-windrose/windrose/ Version: 1.6.5 Editor: @arfon Reviewer: @amoeba Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.1406384

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/1b3fb0a7777ba65071e4d99b65a8c47d"><img src="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/1b3fb0a7777ba65071e4d99b65a8c47d/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](http://joss.theoj.org/papers/1b3fb0a7777ba65071e4d99b65a8c47d/status.svg)](http://joss.theoj.org/papers/1b3fb0a7777ba65071e4d99b65a8c47d)

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) 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 questions

Conflict of interest

• [x] As the reviewer I confirm that there are no conflicts of interest for me to review this work (such as being a major contributor to the software).

General checks

• [x] Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the repository url?
• [x] License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
• [ ] Version: Does the release version given match the GitHub release (1.6)?
• [x] Authorship: Has the submitting author (@scls19fr) made major contributions to the software?

Functionality

• [x] Installation: Does installation proceed as outlined in the documentation?
• [x] Functionality: Have the functional claims of the software been confirmed?
• [x] Performance: Have any performance claims of the software been confirmed?

Documentation

• [x] A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
• [x] Installation instructions: Is there a clearly-stated list of dependencies? Ideally these should be handled with an automated package management solution.
• [x] Example usage: Do the authors include examples of how to use the software (ideally to solve real-world analysis problems).
• [x] Functionality documentation: Is the core functionality of the software documented to a satisfactory level (e.g. API method documentation)?
• [x] Automated tests: Are there automated tests or manual steps described so that the function of the software can be verified?
• [x] Community guidelines: Are there clear guidelines for third parties wishing to 1) Contribute to the software 2) Report issues or problems with the software 3) Seek support

Software paper

• [x] Authors: Does the paper.md file include a list of authors with their affiliations?
• [x] A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
• [x] References: Do all archival references that should have a DOI list one (e.g. papers, datasets, software)?

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[s-celles]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[s-celles]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[s-celles]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[s-celles]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[s-celles]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[s-celles]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[s-celles]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[s-celles]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[s-celles]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[s-celles]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[s-celles]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[arfon]

OK how are we getting along here? Is everything complete now @amoeba & @scls19fr?

[s-celles]

LGTM but let's wait @amoeba opinion.

[amoeba]

Content looks good, thanks @scls19fr. I'm not sure if this was happening before but the PDF version of the paper doesn't show the figures in-line so the examples section is confusing. Could you either find a solution to that or change the bulleted list to a paragraph of text with parenthetical figure references? I'm about to be out of range through Monday in the USA so apologies in advance if my response time drops to zero for a few days here.

[s-celles]

This change have been done by a contributor in https://github.com/python-windrose/windrose/pull/100 Will revert it. But it adds -.

[s-celles]

@whedon generate pdf

[whedon]

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...

[whedon]

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

[s-celles]

Not sure if we can include figure at a specific position without seeing this -.

[amoeba]

LGTM, thanks!

@arfon: Review is complete and I approve the submission assuming the version discrepancy (1.6 vs latest) be resolved at the time of archive.

Thanks for listening to my feedback and making changes in a timely manner @scls19fr!

[amoeba]

Not sure if we can include figure at a specific position without seeing this -.

Oh wow, I didn't even notice that and thought it was just part of the images. I'm not super worried about it at this point.

[arfon]

@scls19fr - At this point could you make an archive of the reviewed software in Zenodo/figshare/other service and update this thread with the DOI of the archive? I can then move forward with accepting the submission.

[tacaswell]

Sorry for dropping off the radar on this.

[s-celles]

v1.6.5 published

See:

• https://zenodo.org/account/settings/github/repository/python-windrose/windrose#
• https://pypi.org/project/windrose/
• https://github.com/python-windrose/windrose

However I can't edit first thread from

Version: 1.6

to

Version: 1.6.5

[arfon]

Version: 1.6.5

Done.

[arfon]

@whedon set 10.5281/zenodo.1406384 as archive

[whedon]

OK. 10.5281/zenodo.1406384 is the archive.