search

openjournals / joss-reviews

Reviews for the Journal of Open Source Software
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
721 stars 38 forks source link

[REVIEW]: morse: an R-package in support of Environmental Risk Assessment #3200

Closed whedon closed 2 years ago

whedon commented 3 years ago

Submitting author: @sandrinecharles (Sandrine CHARLES) Repository: https://github.com/pveber/morse Version: v3.1.0 Editor: @KristinaRiemer Reviewers: @puruckertom, @Peter-Vermeiren Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.5771022

: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

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/1625fe55480a11b31989d7306f41e8f4"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/1625fe55480a11b31989d7306f41e8f4/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/1625fe55480a11b31989d7306f41e8f4/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/1625fe55480a11b31989d7306f41e8f4)

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

@BrandonEdwards & @puruckertom, please carry out your review in this issue by updating the checklist below. If you cannot edit the checklist please:

  1. Make sure you're logged in to your GitHub account
  2. Be sure to accept the invite at this URL: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/invitations

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @KristinaRiemer 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 @puruckertom

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

Review checklist for @Peter-Vermeiren

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

whedon commented 3 years ago

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

  1. Set yourself as 'Not watching' https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews:

watching

  1. You may also like to change your default settings for this watching repositories in your GitHub profile here: https://github.com/settings/notifications

notifications

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 commented 3 years ago 
Software report (experimental):

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.06 s (81.4 files/s, 11920.3 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lua                              2             32             68            255
Markdown                         2             57              0            220
TeX                              1              8              0             92
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                             5             97             68            567
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistical information for the repository '47d9e16232825f7fa157192f' was
gathered on 2021/04/21.
No commited files with the specified extensions were found.
whedon commented 3 years ago 
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1007/s11356-017-9809-4 is OK
- 10.1021/acs.est.7b05464 is OK
- 10.1038/s41598-019-47698-0 is OK
- 10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5377 is OK
- 10.1002/ieam.4061 is OK
- 10.1007/s10646-012-0917-0 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None
whedon commented 3 years ago

:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:

whedon commented 3 years ago

:wave: @BrandonEdwards, please update us on how your review is going (this is an automated reminder).

whedon commented 3 years ago

:wave: @puruckertom, please update us on how your review is going (this is an automated reminder).

arfon commented 3 years ago

@whedon check references

arfon commented 3 years ago

@whedon generate pdf

whedon commented 3 years ago 
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1007/s11356-017-9809-4 is OK
- 10.1021/acs.est.7b05464 is OK
- 10.1038/s41598-019-47698-0 is OK
- 10.2903/j.efsa.2018.5377 is OK
- 10.1002/ieam.4061 is OK
- 10.1007/s10646-012-0917-0 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None
whedon commented 3 years ago

:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

Hi @BrandonEdwards and @puruckertom, have you had a chance to start your reviews of this submission yet? Feel free to file issues in the software repository or ask questions here! Let me know if anything is blocking your work.

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

Hi @puruckertom and @BrandonEdwards, just checking in to see if you have a timeline for when you could start working on this review? Please let me know if I can help in any way!

BrandonEdwards commented 3 years ago

Hi @KristinaRiemer apologies for the delay, and thank you for the poke! Any chance I could have until next Wednesday (16 June) for this?

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

Hi @BrandonEdwards, next Wednesday would be great!

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

Hi @puruckertom, do you have a timeline for when you'll be able to work on the review of this submission?

sandrinecharles commented 3 years ago

Dear colleagues, thank you to take care of our submission. for your information, we would really need your feedback especially my young colleague V. Baudrot who would need to this improvement in his publication list in order to apply for a new position soon. Best regards. S. Charles

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

@BrandonEdwards and @puruckertom have you been able to start working on this review yet?

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

@BrandonEdwards and @puruckertom are you going to be able to start working on this review soon? I reached out to y'all via email also and have not heard back yet. An estimated timeline would be useful, especially given the benefits of a timely review for one of the submission authors. Let me know if you need any help or have any questions!

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

Hi @sandrinecharles, thanks again for your JOSS submission! This is to notify you that I'm going to be on vacation July 14 - August 8. Hopefully you and the submission reviewers @BrandonEdwards and @puruckertom will be able to make progress on this submission's review in my absence. If anything urgent comes up during that time period, feel free to contact EiC @arfon. If you have any questions right now, please let me know.

sandrinecharles commented 3 years ago

Hi @KristinaRiemer thank you for taking care about this submission; it is a pity that the process takes a so long time to be achieved regarding the short length of the paper. I will be on holidays from July the 23rd, able to remain partially connected in case reviewers have questions. I really hope sometime happens soon. Have a good holiday time, best regards, Sandrine

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

Hi @sandrinecharles, sorry about the delays. We do our best to make the JOSS review process fairly timely and straightforward, but it doesn't always work out that way unfortunately. Thanks for your patience!

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

/ooo July 14 until August 8

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

Hi reviewers @BrandonEdwards & @puruckertom, could you update me on what progress has been made on these reviews? We are well past the six week deadline for this, so please let me know what I can do to help facilitate progress!

sandrinecharles commented 3 years ago

Dear @KristinaRiemer thanks a lot to follow the review process of our paper ; I cannot understand why it is so long, that is really a pity and could discourage us to submit other manuscripts to JOSS. What is happening with reviewers? The paper is rather short so that it should be quick to review... Bets regards, Sandrine Charles

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

Hi @sandrinecharles, sorry about the delay, I'm sure this is frustrating. The reviewers are not just going to be reviewing the paper, but also looking at the software itself, so that can be a substantial commitment of time.

@BrandonEdwards has let me know that he will be doing his review this week!

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

Hi @sandrinecharles. To update you on the current status of the reviewers, I have heard from both reviewers several times via email and they have said they will be able to finish their reviews. If they have not been able to finish the initial reviews by this Friday, I will have to look for new reviewers. Thank you so much for being patient with this process!

sandrinecharles commented 3 years ago

thanks @KristinaRiemer for keeping me informed. I hesitate between laughing and crying, and this situation makes me also hesitate a lot to submit another manuscript that we currently polishing. BRs, Sandrine

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

Hi @sandrinecharles, sorry for this taking so long. I do want to emphasize that this is an unusual circumstance. Most JOSS submissions get through the review process faster than this, which is also generally faster than manuscripts at most scientific journals.

@BrandonEdwards @puruckertom this is a friendly reminder to have your reviews in by tomorrow please!

sandrinecharles commented 3 years ago

@KristinaRiemer In case you would have to ask for another reviewers, I had suggested several ones that would be able to do a good job. Please consider these proposals in priority maybe ir order maybe to accelerate the process later on.

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

I reached out to some of your recommended folks when I was looking for reviewers, but these two reviewers were the first to respond and agree to review. I think that sounds like a good next step, thank you.

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

@whedon re-invite @puruckertom as reviewer

whedon commented 3 years ago

OK, the reviewer has been re-invited.

@puruckertom please accept the invite by clicking this link: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/invitations

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

@sandrinecharles @puruckertom has completed his review, but I don't think has passed along comments to you yet?

sandrinecharles commented 3 years ago

Good news @KristinaRiemer! However, as you guessed, I did not received this review yet.

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

I've reached out, so you should hear back soon.

sandrinecharles commented 3 years ago

👍

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

As it seems that @BrandonEdwards is unable to complete his review, I'm looking for alternative reviewers, starting with the author's list of suggestions again.

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

@puruckertom could you post links to your comments here please?

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

@sandrinecharles, as an update, I've followed up with some of your suggested reviewers. Some folks got back to me and said they didn't feel comfortable enough with their software skills to do the review, and I haven't gotten responses back from others yet.

sandrinecharles commented 3 years ago

@KristinaRiemer did you received both reviews? In cas, I can suggest other reviewers, this submission took too much time already, we really need a feedback asap now!

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

@puruckertom has done their review, but I don't think has posted the comments yet, just filled out the checklist. I haven't heard anything from @BrandonEdwards in a while, so I was looking for another reviewer. All three folks you suggested have now gotten back to me, and none feel they have sufficient skills to review this. If you have suggestions for other reviewers who would feel able to review this, please feel free to share and I'll reach out to them.

sandrinecharles commented 3 years ago

@KristinaRiemer I can propose to contact:

puruckertom commented 3 years ago

I think this is a very useful R package and a well-written manuscript. I have added issues to the morse_paper repo relevant to the checklist items that are part of JOSS’ peer review process. I commend the authors for their code contribution and the extent of the available documentation for learning how to use the package.

List of issues

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

@sandrinecharles I've contacted folks from your list that I haven't already asked a couple weeks ago, thanks for that list! Could you comment here when you've addressed all of @puruckertom's issues?

sandrinecharles commented 3 years ago

Yes @KristinaRiemer, I will provide a new version soon including puruckertom's comments. I already started to work on this but not I have not finalised yet.

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

@sandrinecharles great! Definitely let me know if you have any questions.

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

Hi @sandrinecharles, Peter Vermeiren has agreed to be a reviewer for this submission! Just FYI, they did say that they will be able to do the review at the beginning of November due to being busy for the next couple of weeks.

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

@whedon add @Peter-Vermeiren as reviewer

KristinaRiemer commented 3 years ago

@whedon remove @BrandonEdwards as reviewer

whedon commented 3 years ago

OK, @BrandonEdwards is no longer a reviewer