search

openjournals / joss-reviews

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

[REVIEW]: atlite: A Lightweight Python Package for Calculating Renewable Power Potentials and Time Series #3294

Closed whedon closed 3 years ago

whedon commented 3 years ago

Submitting author: @fabianhofmann (Fabian Hofmann) Repository: https://github.com/PyPSA/atlite Version: v0.2.5 Editor: @timtroendle Reviewer: @kanderso-nrel, @crvernon Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.5026365

: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/2633d9a82d0ce2720a1ae8d09619ecab"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/2633d9a82d0ce2720a1ae8d09619ecab/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/2633d9a82d0ce2720a1ae8d09619ecab/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/2633d9a82d0ce2720a1ae8d09619ecab)

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

@kanderso-nrel & @crvernon, 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 @timtroendle 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 @kanderso-nrel

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

Review checklist for @crvernon

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. @kanderso-nrel, @crvernon 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=0.11 s (699.8 files/s, 135566.2 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          27           1184           1552           2863
Jupyter Notebook                 7              0           6579            434
reStructuredText                11            238            190            406
DOS Batch                        1             55              3            359
YAML                            24             57            181            239
Markdown                         3             20              0             70
CSS                              1             14              6             54
make                             1              7             10              9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            75           1575           8521           4434
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Statistical information for the repository '7d07309e1ebdf804c8ab368a' was
gathered on 2021/05/19.
The following historical commit information, by author, was found:

Author                     Commits    Insertions      Deletions    % of changes
Bryn Pickering                   1             6              1            0.05
David Schlachtberger             6            86             32            0.92
Fabian                           8            63             30            0.73
Fabian Neumann                   1             9              3            0.09
FabianHofmann                   12          1138            111            9.77
Jonas Hoersch                   65          2738            954           28.88
Jonas Hörsch                    76          4258           2289           51.21
Leon                             1             7              2            0.07
Markus Schlott                  11           347             68            3.25
Tom Brown                       17           321             34            2.78
euronion                        14           215             64            2.18
fabianhofmann                    1             2              2            0.03
hailiangliu89                    2             2              2            0.03

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
David Schlachtberger         55           64.0         50.8               23.64
Fabian                       60           95.2          6.2               25.00
Fabian Neumann                1           11.1          5.8                0.00
FabianHofmann              1108           97.4          2.2                7.76
Jonas Hoersch               764           27.9         32.6                8.12
Jonas Hörsch               3363           79.0         10.7               13.98
Leon                          1           14.3         23.1                0.00
Markus Schlott               64           18.4         52.8                4.69
Tom Brown                    83           25.9         47.2               15.66
euronion                    100           46.5         24.9               12.00
whedon commented 3 years ago

PDF failed to compile for issue #3294 with the following error: 

 Can't find any papers to compile :-(
whedon commented 3 years ago

Failed to discover a valid open source license.

timtroendle commented 3 years ago

@whedon generate pdf from branch joss-review-fneum

whedon commented 3 years ago 
Attempting PDF compilation from custom branch joss-review-fneum. Reticulating splines etc...
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:

timtroendle commented 3 years ago

@crvernon, @kanderso-nrel, we are still in reduced service mode in which we ask reviewers to finish their review within six weeks. I'll add a reminder for each of you when half of that time has elapsed.

Of course we are happy if you can finish your review earlier than that.

timtroendle commented 3 years ago

@whedon remind @crvernon in 3 weeks

whedon commented 3 years ago

Reminder set for @crvernon in 3 weeks

timtroendle commented 3 years ago

@whedon remind @kanderso-nrel in 3 weeks

whedon commented 3 years ago

Reminder set for @kanderso-nrel in 3 weeks

FabianHofmann commented 3 years ago

@whedon create pdf from branch joss

whedon commented 3 years ago

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

@whedon commands
FabianHofmann commented 3 years ago

@timtroendle the branch joss-review-fneum was only for intern review :) (I deleted it to avoid confusion)

FabianHofmann commented 3 years ago

@whedon generate pdf from branch joss

whedon commented 3 years ago 
Attempting PDF compilation from custom branch joss. Reticulating splines etc...
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:

crvernon commented 3 years ago

@whedon generate pdf from branch joss

whedon commented 3 years ago 
Attempting PDF compilation from custom branch joss. Reticulating splines etc...
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:

crvernon commented 3 years ago

@timtroendle @FabianHofmann I'll be ready to sign off on this once my final two issues have been resolved related to installation and references. Doing great @FabianHofmann , you're almost there!

euronion commented 3 years ago

@whedon generate pdf from branch joss

whedon commented 3 years ago 
Attempting PDF compilation from custom branch joss. Reticulating splines etc...
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:

euronion commented 3 years ago

Co-author here, as @FabianHofmann is busy this week. We're on it 👍 .

whedon commented 3 years ago

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

whedon commented 3 years ago

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

kandersolar commented 3 years ago

Haven't started yet but I should have time for it soon 👍

crvernon commented 3 years ago

I only have one checkbox left which is related to "Installation." This issue is open here: https://github.com/PyPSA/atlite/issues/143

Once this is taken care of, my portion of the review will be completed.

whedon commented 3 years ago

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

whedon commented 3 years ago

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

crvernon commented 3 years ago

My last item was just addressed yesterday and closed in https://github.com/PyPSA/atlite/issues/143

I am now good to sign off on recommending that this article is ready for publication from my perspective as a reviewer. Great work @FabianHofmann , @euronion and team!

FabianHofmann commented 3 years ago

Thank you very much @crvernon, this is good news! And the feedback was very helpful :)

kandersolar commented 3 years ago

Hi folks, I apologize for the delay. Overall looking good and I've opened issues for the remaining checkboxes. However I'll ask for guidance from @timtroendle on some possible license issues:

1) The license text is not contained in a root-level LICENSE file but instead in the LICENSES folder. 2) The BSD-2 file has placeholders in the first line: Copyright (c) <year> <owner>. All rights reserved. and the GPL file has some extra text at the top that I'm not sure is officially part of the license, though I might be wrong. 3) The two Creative Commons licenses are not included in the OSI list.

@timtroendle can you weigh in on whether any of these are a problem from JOSS's perspective? This section at the bottom of the README has some information that might be helpful: https://github.com/PyPSA/atlite#licence

euronion commented 3 years ago

Hi @kanderso-nrel , Thanks for your comments and issues you brought up!

Some additional information on the license which might be relevant: We're using REUSE with our software and repository. That's why there is a LICENSES folder. We checked and restored REUSE compliance in a recent update this week and added the appropriate badge (see https://github.com/PyPSA/atlite/tree/170480d340414f4b18f8bd36dca544a53055e8ce).

timtroendle commented 3 years ago

Hi @kanderso-nrel and @euronion, thanks for pointing this out. I needed to do some research myself first to understand whether the licensing would be of any problem for JOSS. The points mentioned in your comments (1) and (3) are fine, @kanderso-nrel. The Creative Commons licenses are fine as long as they are used for documentation and data only. The placeholder line in the BSD-2 file is unusual, but I understand it's the way this is handled by REUSE. As the copyright owners and years are defined on a file basis, this is fine, too.

kandersolar commented 3 years ago

Ok thanks for confirming @timtroendle. I don't consider the final unaddressed issue (https://github.com/PyPSA/atlite/issues/158) to be a blocker so I'm happy to recommend this article for publication 🎉 Please let me know if you need anything else from me.

timtroendle commented 3 years ago

@whedon generate pdf from branch joss

whedon commented 3 years ago 
Attempting PDF compilation from custom branch joss. Reticulating splines etc...
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:

timtroendle commented 3 years ago

@whedon check references

timtroendle commented 3 years ago

@whedon check references from branch joss

whedon commented 3 years ago 
Attempting to check references... from custom branch joss
whedon commented 3 years ago 
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1016/j.energy.2015.09.071 is OK
- 10.1016/j.energy.2018.06.222 is OK
- 10.1016/j.rser.2013.09.012 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.00884 is OK
- 10.1016/j.esr.2018.08.012 is OK
- 10.5334/jors.148 is OK
- 10.1016/j.solener.2009.12.002 is OK
- 10.1016/j.renene.2012.01.049 is OK
- 10.1002/hyp.9740 is OK
- 10.1016/j.mex.2019.05.024 is OK
- 10.1016/0038-092x(88)90045-x is OK
- 10.1016/j.energy.2016.08.060 is OK
- 10.1016/0038-092X(90)90060-P is OK
- 10.1016/j.renene.2009.07.018 is OK
- 10.3390/en11051246 is OK
- 10.1016/j.renene.2006.05.001 is OK
- 10.1016/j.energy.2016.08.068 is OK
- 10.1016/j.joule.2020.07.018 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- http://doi.org/10.5334/jors.148 is INVALID because of 'https://doi.org/' prefix
timtroendle commented 3 years ago

Thank you @kanderso-nrel!

@FabianHofmann, it looks like we are almost there. Can you fix the small DOI issue Whedon identified right above? Can you let us know whether you are planning to fix https://github.com/PyPSA/atlite/issues/158 before submission? Whenever you are ready, can you please

I can then move forward with accepting the submission.

FabianHofmann commented 3 years ago

thanks @timtroendle, sounds good!

FabianHofmann commented 3 years ago

@whedon check references from branch joss

whedon commented 3 years ago 
Attempting to check references... from custom branch joss
whedon commented 3 years ago 
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1016/j.energy.2015.09.071 is OK
- 10.1016/j.energy.2018.06.222 is OK
- 10.1016/j.rser.2013.09.012 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.00884 is OK
- 10.1016/j.esr.2018.08.012 is OK
- 10.5334/jors.148 is OK
- 10.1016/j.solener.2009.12.002 is OK
- 10.1016/j.renene.2012.01.049 is OK
- 10.1002/hyp.9740 is OK
- 10.1016/j.mex.2019.05.024 is OK
- 10.1016/0038-092x(88)90045-x is OK
- 10.5334/jors.148 is OK
- 10.1016/j.energy.2016.08.060 is OK
- 10.1016/0038-092X(90)90060-P is OK
- 10.1016/j.renene.2009.07.018 is OK
- 10.3390/en11051246 is OK
- 10.1016/j.renene.2006.05.001 is OK
- 10.1016/j.energy.2016.08.068 is OK
- 10.1016/j.joule.2020.07.018 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None