Closed whedon closed 2 years ago
Hello human, I'm @whedon, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks. @lostanlen, @malmaud 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
Wordcount for paper.md
is 1310
Software report (experimental):
github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88 T=0.08 s (668.4 files/s, 145034.5 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language files blank comment code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Julia 31 1509 1381 7656
Markdown 17 192 0 974
TeX 1 17 0 244
YAML 4 0 1 120
TOML 3 4 0 53
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM: 56 1722 1382 9047
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Statistical information for the repository 'cd689c006c37304b3a8af5dd' was
gathered on 2021/11/19.
No commited files with the specified extensions were found.
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1007/BF01250288 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4612-2544-7_17 is OK
- 10.1109/78.258102 is OK
- 10.1109/ICASSP.1995.480422 is OK
- 10.1093/biomet/81.3.425 is OK
- 10.2307/2291512 is OK
- 10.1109/TSIPN.2016.2632039 is OK
- 10.1137/1.9781611970104 is OK
- 10.1016/B978-0-12-374370-1.50001-9 is OK
- 10.1201/9781439863619 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4612-2544-7_5 is OK
- 10.1016/S0031-3203(00)00116-3 is OK
- 10.1016/S0031-3203(02)00019-5 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- None
INVALID DOIs
- None
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
:wave: @lostanlen, please update us on how your review is going (this is an automated reminder).
:wave: @malmaud, please update us on how your review is going (this is an automated reminder).
License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
LICENSE is MIT but not recognized by GitHub as such https://github.com/UCD4IDS/WaveletsExt.jl/issues/39
Installation instructions: Is there a clearly-stated list of dependencies? Ideally these should be handled with an automated package management solution.
Necessary vs. recommended dependencies https://github.com/UCD4IDS/WaveletsExt.jl/issues/40
Checking in on this as there hasn't been much action in the past week. @malmaud and @lostanlen . Any updates here?
I know we're going into holidays and it's a busy time of year, but I'd like to know where this one stands and whether we should expect to pause until the new year.
both issues i raised two weeks ago are now closed (39 and 40)
Checking back in to see how things are going on this one. Any updates?
I have raised one issue regarding community guidelines (the last before approval) https://github.com/UCD4IDS/WaveletsExt.jl/issues/42
Update: the issue above has been closed, thanks to @zengfung. At this stage i approve publication in JOSS.
I completed my review and recommend acceptance.
src
directory). @whedon generate pdf
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
@whedon check references
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1007/BF01250288 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4612-2544-7_17 is OK
- 10.1109/78.258102 is OK
- 10.1109/ICASSP.1995.480422 is OK
- 10.1093/biomet/81.3.425 is OK
- 10.2307/2291512 is OK
- 10.1109/TSIPN.2016.2632039 is OK
- 10.1137/1.9781611970104 is OK
- 10.1016/B978-0-12-374370-1.50001-9 is OK
- 10.1201/9781439863619 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4612-2544-7_5 is OK
- 10.1016/S0031-3203(00)00116-3 is OK
- 10.1016/S0031-3203(02)00019-5 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- None
INVALID DOIs
- None
Thanks @lostanlen and @malmaud !
I'm proof-reading the paper now, and have the following comments / suggestions:
Everything else looks good to me so far.
Thanks @bmcfee for your suggestions! I’ve updated the paper in the most recent commit to the master
branch.
@whedon generate pdf
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
Great, thanks @zengfung ! Next steps for you:
Hi @bmcfee, I have completed the steps you mentioned.
@whedon set 10.5281/zenodo.5889625 as archive
OK. 10.5281/zenodo.5889625 is the archive.
@whedon set v0.1.16 as version
OK. v0.1.16 is the version.
@whedon recommend-accept
Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1007/BF01250288 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4612-2544-7_17 is OK
- 10.1109/78.258102 is OK
- 10.1109/ICASSP.1995.480422 is OK
- 10.1093/biomet/81.3.425 is OK
- 10.2307/2291512 is OK
- 10.1109/TSIPN.2016.2632039 is OK
- 10.1137/1.9781611970104 is OK
- 10.1016/B978-0-12-374370-1.50001-9 is OK
- 10.1201/9781439863619 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4612-2544-7_5 is OK
- 10.1016/S0031-3203(00)00116-3 is OK
- 10.1016/S0031-3203(02)00019-5 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- None
INVALID DOIs
- None
:wave: @openjournals/joss-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published.
Check final proof :point_right: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/pull/2901
If the paper PDF and Crossref deposit XML look good in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/pull/2901, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the flag deposit=true
e.g.
@whedon accept deposit=true
Hi @bmcfee I was just proof-reading our work for one last time, and I found that some of the code snippets contain lines of codes that are too long. I made the necessary fixes, and the updates are:
VERSION: v0.1.17 DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.5893843
I hope this isn't too late for changes. Apologies for the inconvenience caused.
@whedon set v0.1.17 as version
OK. v0.1.17 is the version.
@whedon set 10.5281/zenodo.5893843 as archive
OK. 10.5281/zenodo.5893843 is the archive.
@whedon recommend-accept
Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1007/BF01250288 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4612-2544-7_17 is OK
- 10.1109/78.258102 is OK
- 10.1109/ICASSP.1995.480422 is OK
- 10.1093/biomet/81.3.425 is OK
- 10.2307/2291512 is OK
- 10.1109/TSIPN.2016.2632039 is OK
- 10.1137/1.9781611970104 is OK
- 10.1016/B978-0-12-374370-1.50001-9 is OK
- 10.1201/9781439863619 is OK
- 10.1007/978-1-4612-2544-7_5 is OK
- 10.1016/S0031-3203(00)00116-3 is OK
- 10.1016/S0031-3203(02)00019-5 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- None
INVALID DOIs
- None
:wave: @openjournals/joss-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published.
Check final proof :point_right: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/pull/2902
If the paper PDF and Crossref deposit XML look good in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/pull/2902, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the flag deposit=true
e.g.
@whedon accept deposit=true
@whedon accept deposit=true
Doing it live! Attempting automated processing of paper acceptance...
🐦🐦🐦 👉 Tweet for this paper 👈 🐦🐦🐦
🚨🚨🚨 THIS IS NOT A DRILL, YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED A PAPER INTO JOSS! 🚨🚨🚨
Here's what you must now do:
Party like you just published a paper! 🎉🌈🦄💃👻🤘
Any issues? Notify your editorial technical team...
@lostanlen, @malmaud – many thanks for your reviews here and to @bmcfee for editing this submission! JOSS relies upon the volunteer effort of people like you and we simply wouldn't be able to do this without you ✨
@ShozenD – your paper is now accepted and published in JOSS :zap::rocket::boom:
:tada::tada::tada: Congratulations on your paper acceptance! :tada::tada::tada:
If you would like to include a link to your paper from your README use the following code snippets:
Markdown:
[![DOI](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.03937/status.svg)](https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.03937)
HTML:
<a style="border-width:0" href="https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.03937">
<img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.03937/status.svg" alt="DOI badge" >
</a>
reStructuredText:
.. image:: https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.03937/status.svg
:target: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.03937
This is how it will look in your documentation:
We need your help!
Journal of Open Source Software is a community-run journal and relies upon volunteer effort. If you'd like to support us please consider doing either one (or both) of the the following:
Submitting author: @ShozenD (Shozen Dan) Repository: https://github.com/UCD4IDS/WaveletsExt.jl Version: v0.1.17 Editor: @bmcfee Reviewer: @lostanlen, @malmaud Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.5893843
: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
@lostanlen & @malmaud, 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 @bmcfee 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 @lostanlen
✨ Important: Please do not use the Convert to issue functionality when working through this checklist, instead, please open any new issues associated with your review in the software repository associated with the submission. ✨
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper
Review checklist for @malmaud
✨ Important: Please do not use the Convert to issue functionality when working through this checklist, instead, please open any new issues associated with your review in the software repository associated with the submission. ✨
Conflict of interest
Code of Conduct
General checks
Functionality
Documentation
Software paper