Closed editorialbot closed 1 year ago
Hi @JosiahParry , I've added a short definition of isochrones in README, paper and function doc. I understand that these definitions could be useful to non-specialists but I won't go further, isochrone maps are quite standard objects in analyses using travel times. I've also addressed the error handling issues you raised.
Checklist complete.
Big thanks to our reviewers @JosiahParry, @mikemahoney218, @wcjochem for providing thoughtful and constructive review comments to this submission. @rCarto has been able to make revisions in response to those reviews, and I think we've achieved some consensus on the final state of the code and manuscript. So again, thank you to our reviewers; this process obviously doesn't exist without you.
@rCarto there are a few more steps we will go through before we can get osrm
published. First, I will be having the bot check the references in the paper, then I will go through the paper and software once myself to see if there are any typos and things that slipped through the review process. Once that is done I will ping you and ask you to complete a few small tasks (archiving and getting a DOI) so that we can proceed to publication.
@editorialbot generate pdf
@editorialbot check references
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1145/2093973.2094062 is OK
- 10.1111/cobi.13326 is OK
- 10.1080/00131881.2017.1339285 is OK
- 10.1080/23754931.2021.1895875 is OK
- 10.1016/j.simpat.2022.102526 is OK
- 10.14295/transportes.v29i2.2385 is OK
- 10.2373/1864-810X.21-04-05 is OK
- 10.1080/23754931.2018.1519458 is OK
- 10.5604/01.3001.0014.5601 is OK
- 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.10.008 is OK
- 10.1108/IJHMA-02-2018-0017 is OK
- 10.3390/ijerph18073813 is OK
- 10.1016/j.trd.2021.102964 is OK
- 10.1038/s41598-022-09919-x is OK
- 10.3390/ijgi8090400 is OK
- 10.1007/s41060-022-00328-x is OK
- 10.1016/j.ajo.2020.08.038 is OK
- 10.1177/23998083211040519 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127097 is OK
- 10.32614/RJ-2018-053 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.01926 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- None
INVALID DOIs
- None
@rCarto after looking through the package and paper once more, I have a few suggestions:
Let me know if you have any questions, feel free to implement any of these suggestions (or none of them). Just let me know when you are finished making any final changes and I will let you know what the next steps are.
@elbeejay , I've modified the paper following your suggestions. All is ok on my side, I'll wait for your instructions.
@elbeejay , @wcjochem , @JosiahParry and @mikemahoney218 Your careful reading of the paper/doc/code and your precise suggestions helped me raise the package to a much higher quality level. So, thank you very much for your work on this review!
Great, thanks for making those changes. At this time, @rCarto if you could do the following:
Then we will have the metadata and archiving all set, and I'll be able to recommend this for publication in JOSS. Thanks!
osrm
on GitHub: v4.0.0 - https://github.com/riatelab/osrm/releases/tag/v4.0.0 @editorialbot set v4.0.0 as version
Done! version is now v4.0.0
@editorialbot set 10.5281/zenodo.7228376 as archive
Done! Archive is now 10.5281/zenodo.7228376
Looks good @rCarto. Thanks again to @JosiahParry, @mikemahoney218, @wcjochem for taking the time to provide their reviews. At this time I will be recommending that we accept and publish this submission in JOSS. The paper and metadata will be looked over once by an Editor-in-Chief prior to publication.
@editorialbot recommend-accept
Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...
:wave: @openjournals/ese-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published.
Check final proof :point_right::page_facing_up: Download article
If the paper PDF and the deposit XML files look good in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/pull/3637, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command @editorialbot accept
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1145/2093973.2094062 is OK
- 10.1111/cobi.13326 is OK
- 10.1080/00131881.2017.1339285 is OK
- 10.1080/23754931.2021.1895875 is OK
- 10.1016/j.simpat.2022.102526 is OK
- 10.14295/transportes.v29i2.2385 is OK
- 10.2373/1864-810X.21-04-05 is OK
- 10.1080/23754931.2018.1519458 is OK
- 10.5604/01.3001.0014.5601 is OK
- 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.10.008 is OK
- 10.1108/IJHMA-02-2018-0017 is OK
- 10.3390/ijerph18073813 is OK
- 10.1016/j.trd.2021.102964 is OK
- 10.1038/s41598-022-09919-x is OK
- 10.3390/ijgi8090400 is OK
- 10.1007/s41060-022-00328-x is OK
- 10.1016/j.ajo.2020.08.038 is OK
- 10.1177/23998083211040519 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127097 is OK
- 10.32614/RJ-2018-053 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.01926 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- None
INVALID DOIs
- None
Hi @rCarto! Things are looking ready to go except — please go through your references and fix up the capitalization. For example, "r" is not capitalized several places, but please go through each carefully to be sure they all look perfect.
oh and you can preserve capitalization in your .bib file with {} around characters/strings.
@editorialbot generate pdf
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
Hello @kthyng , I think references are fixed now.
Ok looks good!
@editorialbot accept
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:
Any issues? Notify your editorial technical team...
Congratulations on your new publication @rCarto! Many thanks to editor @elbeejay and reviewers @JosiahParry, @mikemahoney218, and @wcjochem for your time, hard work, and expertise!!
: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.04574/status.svg)](https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04574)
HTML:
<a style="border-width:0" href="https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04574">
<img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.04574/status.svg" alt="DOI badge" >
</a>
reStructuredText:
.. image:: https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.04574/status.svg
:target: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04574
This is how it will look in your documentation:
We need your help!
The 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:
Congrats @rCarto !
Thank you very much to editors and reviewers. This was a very pleasant process.
Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@rCarto<!--end-author-handle-- (Timothée Giraud) Repository: https://github.com/riatelab/osrm/ Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v4.0.0 Editor: !--editor-->@elbeejay<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @JosiahParry, @mikemahoney218, @wcjochem Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.7228376
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
@JosiahParry & @mikemahoney218, your review will be checklist based. Each of you will have a separate checklist that you should update when carrying out your review. First of all you need to run this command in a separate comment to create the checklist:
The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @elbeejay 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 ✨
Checklists
📝 Checklist for @JosiahParry
📝 Checklist for @mikemahoney218
📝 Checklist for @wcjochem