Closed editorialbot closed 1 year ago
Hello humans, 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 commands
For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:
@editorialbot generate pdf
Software report:
github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88 T=0.09 s (988.6 files/s, 218182.6 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language files blank comment code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HTML 34 1727 470 9116
R 25 226 581 1975
Markdown 6 369 0 1349
Rmd 4 319 857 429
CSS 3 99 48 428
JavaScript 4 64 34 266
YAML 7 35 6 237
TeX 1 11 0 102
SVG 1 0 1 11
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM: 85 2850 1997 13913
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository
Wordcount for paper.md
is 1167
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1080/09557571.2021.1980498 is OK
- 10.1093/jogss/ogac009 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.01509 is OK
- 10.32614/RJ-2019-033 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 @drmowinckels, @milenamilena, please see the instructions at the top of the review thread.
Once you've generated your checklist you can use this as the basis for your review. Generally speaking it's useful to post an overview here, but deal with individual points by opening issues on the target repository, and linking them here so we are all on the same page. Feel free to direct any queries to me, but otherwise we look forward to the benefit of your expertise.
@editorialbot generate pdf
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
@editorialbot check references
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1080/09557571.2021.1980498 is OK
- 10.1093/jogss/ogac009 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.01509 is OK
- 10.32614/RJ-2019-033 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- None
INVALID DOIs
- None
@milenamilena @drmowinckels Many thanks for your feedback so far - I highly appreciate your time and energy going into it! I incorporated your suggested changes that we have received so far and updated the PDF.
I have completed my review, and I found this package very useful and holistic in giving an overview of data. The functions are very clear and well explained. The latex tables were beneficial, as the format is very clear. I also found very interesting the use of the Venn diagram and the ability to customise some gglots. I agree with the comments made by @drmowinckels and am happy to see that they were addressed. It is very promising to see that there are open issues in the repository, mainly for further enhancement. The whole paper is very explanatory, even for a naive R user.
I have completed my review and am happy with the responses and changes made to the package and paper. The package functionality is well documented and covers something that has no real alternative in the R eco-system as I know it. Its clearly well-thought out and tested, and the implementation is great.
@samhforbes I believe both reviewers are happy with the package and paper status.
@editorialbot generate pdf
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
Hi @milenamilena @drmowinckels thanks for your hard work and suggestions. We appreciate both your thoroughness and the time spent reviewing and improving packages for JOSS.
@cosimameyer it looks like things are all coming together!
There's a couple of things we need to do before ticking off the final box. So can you please:
Thanks!
Thanks for the update and for putting your time into it - it’s highly appreciated! This review process is one of the best I've experienced (not just because of the outcome 😉) I think the discussions here and in the issues as well as the general feedback you get are so valuable! So thanks to all you for volunteering at the journal and for sharing your expertise ☺️
@samhforbes here's the missing information:
@cosimameyer Brilliant stuff - I'll make those changes here, and then I am satisfied we can recommend accept. Well done on a great package and paper.
@editorialbot set v0.0.12 as version
Done! version is now v0.0.12
@editorialbot set 10.5281/zenodo.7075665 as archive
Done! Archive is now 10.5281/zenodo.7075665
@editorialbot recommend-accept
Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...
:warning: Error prepararing paper acceptance. The generated XML metadata file is invalid.
Element xref is not declared in institution list of possible children
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1080/09557571.2021.1980498 is OK
- 10.1093/jogss/ogac009 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.01509 is OK
- 10.32614/RJ-2019-033 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- Errored finding suggestions for "Moving beyond votes: Estimating and analyzing stat...", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "Power struggle and spark of hope: The political el...", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "naniar: Data Structures, Summaries, and Visualisat...", please try later
INVALID DOIs
- None
@openjournals/joss-eics @openjournals/dev something mysterious is afoot! ☝️
I would be surprised if it is the missing DOIs @cosimameyer that are causing that error, but no harm in fixing those while we wait. 😊
@editorialbot check references
@oliviaguest Thanks for following up! I'm not sure if it really is a missing DOI (I didn't change anything in the references). The first two were already part of our initial submission (and, as far as I know, they don't have a DOI) and the third one (naniar
) was added as part of the review process - but I checked the references after making the changes here (https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/4740#issuecomment-1239705390) and the editorial bot did not complain. Let me know what you think 😊
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1080/09557571.2021.1980498 is OK
- 10.1093/jogss/ogac009 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.01509 is OK
- 10.32614/RJ-2019-033 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- Errored finding suggestions for "Moving beyond votes: Estimating and analyzing stat...", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "Draw Venn Diagram by ’ggplot2’", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "Convert Country Names and Country Codes", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "dplyr: A Grammar of Data Manipulation", please try later
INVALID DOIs
- None
For the references with missing DOIs @editorialbot tries to find suggestions using the Crossref API. That error message means Crossref server did not respond, so probably there's a problem in their side. The solution is just wait and retry later.
OK, just try again later, @samhforbes. Thanks @xuanxu! ☺️
@editorialbot check references
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1080/09557571.2021.1980498 is OK
- 10.1093/jogss/ogac009 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.01509 is OK
- 10.32614/RJ-2019-033 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- Errored finding suggestions for "Moving beyond votes: Estimating and analyzing stat...", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "Power struggle and spark of hope: The political el...", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "dlookr: Tools for Data Diagnosis, Exploration, Tra...", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "summarytools", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "Draw Venn Diagram by ’ggplot2’", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "Convert Country Names and Country Codes", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "ggplot2: Create Elegant Data Visualisations Using ...", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "dplyr: A Grammar of Data Manipulation", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "overviewR", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "Hmisc: Harrell Miscellaneous", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "gtsummary: Presentation-Ready Data Summary and Ana...", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "naniar: Data Structures, Summaries, and Visualisat...", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "skimr: Compact and Flexible Summaries of Data", please try later
- Errored finding suggestions for "DataExplorer: Automate Data Exploration and Treatm...", please try later
INVALID DOIs
- None
@editorialbot check references
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1080/09557571.2021.1980498 is OK
- 10.1093/jogss/ogac009 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.01509 is OK
- 10.32614/RJ-2019-033 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- None
INVALID DOIs
- None
@samhforbes it worked 🎉
@editorialbot recommend-accept
Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...
:warning: Error prepararing paper acceptance. The generated XML metadata file is invalid.
Element xref is not declared in institution list of possible children
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1080/09557571.2021.1980498 is OK
- 10.1093/jogss/ogac009 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.01509 is OK
- 10.32614/RJ-2019-033 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- None
INVALID DOIs
- None
As far as I understand the log (and I might be completely off here), there is an invalid JATS. Is it the DOI that I provided that causes the problems? I'm not sure but I believe it should be fine. If there's anything that I can/should do, let me know 😊
@xuanxu - can you take a look at this?
Right Crossref seems to think all systems are operational so I'll have another go here.
@editorialbot recommend-accept
Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...
:warning: Error prepararing paper acceptance. The generated XML metadata file is invalid.
Element xref is not declared in institution list of possible children
Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@cosimameyer<!--end-author-handle-- (Cosima Meyer) Repository: https://github.com/cosimameyer/overviewR Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): master Version: v0.0.12 Editor: !--editor-->@samhforbes<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @drmowinckels, @milenamilena Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.7097560
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
@drmowinckels & @milenamilena, 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 @samhforbes 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 @drmowinckels
📝 Checklist for @milenamilena