[REVIEW]: Scientific Computational Imaging Code (SCICO)

editorialbot commented 2 years ago

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@bwohlberg@danielskatz<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @vitorsr, @DanNixon, @lucaferranti Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.7255839

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/9c65b12d2b4be53b25a01943484cff22"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/9c65b12d2b4be53b25a01943484cff22/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/9c65b12d2b4be53b25a01943484cff22/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/9c65b12d2b4be53b25a01943484cff22)

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

@vitorsr & @DanNixon & @lucaferranti, 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:

@editorialbot generate my checklist

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @danielskatz 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 @vitorsr

📝 Checklist for @DanNixon

📝 Checklist for @lucaferranti

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:

danielskatz commented 1 year ago

@editorialbot set 10.5281/zenodo.7255839 as archive

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

Done! Archive is now 10.5281/zenodo.7255839

danielskatz commented 1 year ago

@editorialbot set v0.0.3 as version

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

Done! version is now v0.0.3

danielskatz commented 1 year ago

@editorialbot recommend-accept

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1137/080716542 is OK
- 10.1137/1.9781611974997 is OK
- 10.1561/2200000016 is OK
- 10.1007/s10851-010-0251-1 is OK
- 10.1117/12.766355 is OK
- 10.1002/cpa.20042 is OK
- 10.1137/09076934x is OK
- 10.1016/0898-1221(76)90003-1 is OK
- 10.1109/TIP.2017.2713099 is OK
- 10.1109/LSP.2017.2763583 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2203.17061 is OK
- 10.1109/MSP.2020.3016905 is OK
- 10.1007/978-0-387-40065-5 is OK
- 10.1561/2400000003 is OK
- 10.1561/2400000003 is OK
- 10.1109/iccv.2011.6126441 is OK
- 10.1109/TCI.2016.2599778 is OK
- 10.1109/GlobalSIP.2013.6737048 is OK
- 10.1090/s0025-5718-2012-02598-1 is OK
- 10.1109/TIP.2017.2662206 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

:wave: @openjournals/csism-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/3656, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command @editorialbot accept

danielskatz commented 1 year ago

@bwohlberg - I just have one small change from my proofreading: https://github.com/lanl/scico/pull/361 can you please merge this? Then we can continue the process.

bwohlberg commented 1 year ago

Thanks @danielskatz. Your PR has been merged.

danielskatz commented 1 year ago

@editorialbot recommend-accept

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1137/080716542 is OK
- 10.1137/1.9781611974997 is OK
- 10.1561/2200000016 is OK
- 10.1007/s10851-010-0251-1 is OK
- 10.1117/12.766355 is OK
- 10.1002/cpa.20042 is OK
- 10.1137/09076934x is OK
- 10.1016/0898-1221(76)90003-1 is OK
- 10.1109/TIP.2017.2713099 is OK
- 10.1109/LSP.2017.2763583 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2203.17061 is OK
- 10.1109/MSP.2020.3016905 is OK
- 10.1007/978-0-387-40065-5 is OK
- 10.1561/2400000003 is OK
- 10.1561/2400000003 is OK
- 10.1109/iccv.2011.6126441 is OK
- 10.1109/TCI.2016.2599778 is OK
- 10.1109/GlobalSIP.2013.6737048 is OK
- 10.1090/s0025-5718-2012-02598-1 is OK
- 10.1109/TIP.2017.2662206 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

:wave: @openjournals/csism-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/3657, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command @editorialbot accept

danielskatz commented 1 year ago

@editorialbot accept

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

Doing it live! Attempting automated processing of paper acceptance...

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

🐦🐦🐦 👉 Tweet for this paper 👈 🐦🐦🐦

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

🚨🚨🚨 THIS IS NOT A DRILL, YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED A PAPER INTO JOSS! 🚨🚨🚨

Here's what you must now do:

Check final PDF and Crossref metadata that was deposited :point_right: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/pull/3658
Wait a couple of minutes, then verify that the paper DOI resolves https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04722
If everything looks good, then close this review issue.
Party like you just published a paper! 🎉🌈🦄💃👻🤘

Any issues? Notify your editorial technical team...

danielskatz commented 1 year ago

Congratulations to @bwohlberg (Brendt Wohlberg) and co-authors!!

And thanks to @vitorsr, @DanNixon, and @lucaferranti for reviewing! We couldn't do this without you

editorialbot commented 1 year ago

: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.04722/status.svg)](https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04722)

HTML:
<a style="border-width:0" href="https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04722">
  <img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.04722/status.svg" alt="DOI badge" >
</a>

reStructuredText:
.. image:: https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.04722/status.svg
   :target: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.04722

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:

Volunteering to review for us sometime in the future. You can add your name to the reviewer list here: https://joss.theoj.org/reviewer-signup.html
Making a small donation to support our running costs here: https://numfocus.org/donate-to-joss

bwohlberg commented 1 year ago

Thank you @danielskatz, @vitorsr, @DanNixon, and @lucaferranti!

openjournals / joss-reviews