Closed editorialbot closed 2 years ago
editorialbot
commented
2 years ago Hello human, I'm @editorialbot, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks.
For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:
@editorialbot commandsFor example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:
@editorialbot generate pdfSoftware report:
github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88 T=0.05 s (186.4 files/s, 226258.3 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language files blank comment code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
XML 1 0 0 9904
R 1 18 281 1327
Markdown 6 104 0 368
TeX 1 13 0 102
YAML 1 2 4 18
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM: 10 137 285 11719
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repositoryWordcount for paper.md is 529
editorialbot
commented
2 years ago Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- None
MISSING DOIs
- 10.1093/wjaf/13.3.85 may be a valid DOI for title: Increased value through optimal bucking
- 10.1287/mnsc.30.2.245 may be a valid DOI for title: Log bucking and lumber manufacturing using dynamic programming
- 10.1080/028275800448002 may be a valid DOI for title: The effect of two different price systems on the value and cross-cutting patterns of Norway spruce logs
- 10.1007/s10342-020-01313-4 may be a valid DOI for title: Using harvester data from on-board computers: a review of key findings, opportunities and challenges
- 10.1093/forestry/cpm012 may be a valid DOI for title: Comparing model-based approaches with bucking simulation-based approach in the prediction of timber assortment recovery
- 10.1080/02827589809382964 may be a valid DOI for title: Optimal cross-cutting and sensitivity analysis for various log dimension constraints by using dynamic programming approach
INVALID DOIs
- None:warning: An error happened when generating the pdf.
arfon
commented
2 years ago @editorialbot query scope
@lennartnoordermeer – this software looks to be packaged in a somewhat non-standard way. As such, I'm going to query the scope to see whether the JOSS editorial team feels like this submission is ready to head out to review. We should get back to you sometime next week.
editorialbot
commented
2 years ago Submission flagged for editorial review.
lennartnoordermeer
commented
2 years ago Dear JOSS editor,
I have looked at the list of potential reviewers, and it seems the following people may be suitable reviewers:
kauedesousa; @. dlebauer; @. Prof-ThiagoOliveira; @.***
Kind regards,
Lennart Noordermeer
On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 6:36 AM The Open Journals editorial robot < @.***> wrote:
Submitting author: @lennartnoordermeer https://github.com/lennartnoordermeer (Lennart Noordermeer http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8840-0345) Repository: https://github.com/lennartnoordermeer/optBuck Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: 0.1.0 Editor: Pending Reviewers: Pending Managing EiC: Arfon Smith Status
[image: status] https://joss.theoj.org/papers/e18e56d01892afb7ed0182ea34490729
Status badge code:
HTML:
Markdown:
Author instructions
Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @lennartnoordermeer https://github.com/lennartnoordermeer. Currently, there isn't an JOSS editor assigned to your paper.
The author's suggestion for the handling editor is @jbytecode https://github.com/jbytecode.
@lennartnoordermeer https://github.com/lennartnoordermeer 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 https://bit.ly/joss-reviewers 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 @editorialbot https://github.com/editorialbot is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @editorialbot https://github.com/editorialbot can do for you type:
@editorialbot commands
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/4431, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJAMFNMQ4OUJY7IVTGMDH53VL35V5ANCNFSM5W7RYWDA . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>
danielskatz
commented
2 years ago 👋 @lennartnoordermeer - I'm sorry to say that after discussion amongst the JOSS editors, we have decided that this submission does not meet our criteria for review by JOSS, due to issues with packaging, code quality, lack of tests, etc. Please see https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/submitting.html#other-venues-for-reviewing-and-publishing-software-packages for other suggestions for how you might receive credit for your work.
danielskatz
commented
2 years ago @editorialbot reject
editorialbot
commented
2 years ago Paper rejected.
lennartnoordermeer
commented
2 years ago Dear editor,
Thank you for considering our submission, we understand that the package does not the JOSS criteria. The package is in an early stage and will be developed further the coming years as part of a research project. If at a later point in time, say in one year, we feel that the package is eligeble for resubmission to JOSS, would that be a possibility? During the coming year, we will be improving the packaging, code quality and tests.
On behalf of both authors, Lennart Noordermeer
On Wed, Jun 1, 2022 at 3:55 PM Daniel S. Katz @.***> wrote:
👋 @lennartnoordermeer https://github.com/lennartnoordermeer - I'm sorry to say that after discussion amongst the JOSS editors, we have decided that this submission does not meet our criteria for review by JOSS, due to issues with packaging, code quality, lack of tests, etc. Please see https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/submitting.html#other-venues-for-reviewing-and-publishing-software-packages for other suggestions for how you might receive credit for your work.
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/4431#issuecomment-1143645331, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJAMFNMDQYCKVT5YJ6DLHNDVM5TW5ANCNFSM5W7RYWDA . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>
danielskatz
commented
2 years ago Yes, we would be happy to consider a future submission.
Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@lennartnoordermeer<!--end-author-handle-- (Lennart Noordermeer) Repository: https://github.com/lennartnoordermeer/optBuck Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: 0.1.0 Editor: Pending Reviewers: Pending Managing EiC: Arfon Smith
Status
Status badge code:
Author instructions
Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @lennartnoordermeer. Currently, there isn't an JOSS editor assigned to your paper.
The author's suggestion for the handling editor is @jbytecode.
@lennartnoordermeer 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 @editorialbot is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @editorialbot can do for you type: