Closed whedon closed 2 years ago
Hello human, I'm @whedon, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.
: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.
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 1191
Software report (experimental):
github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88 T=5.53 s (24.4 files/s, 110112.7 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language files blank comment code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JSON 34 0 0 596261
Python 67 1203 2254 6812
reStructuredText 21 243 360 584
SVG 2 2 2 349
YAML 7 9 20 224
TeX 1 21 0 205
Markdown 2 23 0 70
TOML 1 0 0 6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM: 135 1501 2636 604511
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Statistical information for the repository 'c5e9dc91e7563a2a4d9be693' was
gathered on 2022/01/21.
The following historical commit information, by author, was found:
Author Commits Insertions Deletions % of changes
Kraus 1 74 73 0.48
Kraus, Peter 16 3924 1935 19.14
Nicolas Vetsch 1 544 0 1.78
Peter Kraus 27 3375 1261 15.14
Vetsch, Nicolas 2 1940 169 6.89
krpe 88 6880 4842 38.29
vetschn 44 2983 2617 18.29
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
Kraus, Peter 6595 168.1 2.1 2.79
Nicolas Vetsch 544 100.0 0.0 6.25
Peter Kraus 336 10.0 4.7 12.50
Vetsch, Nicolas 2789 143.8 0.5 6.38
vetschn 5 0.2 2.3 0.00
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 is OK
- 10.33774/chemrxiv-2021-mh17g is OK
- 10.1002/cctc.202001132 is OK
- 10.1186/1471-2105-13-115 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-3881/aabc4f is OK
- 10.1007/s11244-020-01380-2 is OK
- 10.1038/sdata.2016.18 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:
Hi @PeterKraus, normally we would find an editor at this stage, who would then identify and assign reviewers for your submission—unfortunately none of the editors with relevant expertise are available right now, so we have to put your submission on our waitlist for the time being.
In the meantime, it would be a great help if you could suggest any reviewers, to help speed up the process once we do assign an editor. Thanks!
Hi @kyleniemeyer, no worries, I understand the delays. I had a look at the reviewer list, and here are some suggestions, as requested starting at the bottom of the list:
Cheers!
@whedon invite @galessiorob as editor
@galessiorob has been invited to edit this submission.
:wave: @galessiorob do you think you can take this one on?
@whedon add @galessiorob as editor
I'm sorry human, I don't understand that. You can see what commands I support by typing:
@whedon commands
@whedon assign @galessiorob as editor
OK, the editor is @galessiorob
👋 Hi @PeterKraus
I'm in the process of finding editors for this paper. If you have any suggestions feel free to add their handles in a comment, and I can send them invites. Looking forward to working on this paper!
Hi @galessiorob, pleasure to have you as an editor. I've listed a few names of folks who seem to have the right interest & coding preferences from the lower parts of the "signed-up reviewers" sheet here - not sure if you want me to actually tag them or what's the process?
Awesome, thanks so much @PeterKraus! I can reach out to them and once we have two or three volunteers I'll open a review issue with a checklist for them to use as a guide.
@whedon add @aozorahime as reviewer
OK, @aozorahime is now a reviewer
@whedon add @1mikegrn as reviewer
OK, @1mikegrn is now a reviewer
@whedon start review
OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/4166.
Submitting author: @PeterKraus (Peter Kraus) Repository: https://github.com/dgbowl/yadg Version: v4.0.0 Editor: @galessiorob Reviewers: @aozorahime, @1mikegrn Managing EiC: Kyle Niemeyer
: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:
Author instructions
Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @PeterKraus. Currently, there isn't an JOSS editor assigned to your paper.
The author's suggestion for the handling editor is @jgostick.
@PeterKraus if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). In addition, this list of people have already agreed to review for JOSS and may be suitable for this submission (please start at the bottom of the list).
Editor instructions
The JOSS submission bot @whedon is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @whedon can do for you type: