[PRE REVIEW]: Port: A software tool for digital data donation

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@lauraboeschoten<!--end-author-handle-- (Laura Boeschoten) Repository: https://github.com/eyra/port Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): d3I-jboss-paper Version: v1.0.1 Editor: !--editor-->@osorensen<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @kaustavbhattacharjee, @naltun, @leonardojaneis Managing EiC: Olivia Guest

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/11922a83c07ff2fc0a2cb70d962984aa"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/11922a83c07ff2fc0a2cb70d962984aa/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/11922a83c07ff2fc0a2cb70d962984aa/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/11922a83c07ff2fc0a2cb70d962984aa)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @lauraboeschoten. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@lauraboeschoten if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). You can search the list of people that have already agreed to review and may be suitable for this submission.

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:

@editorialbot commands

[editorialbot]

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 commands

For example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.16 s (1003.3 files/s, 248032.0 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JSON                             9              0              0          30924
TypeScript                      78            389             46           3144
JavaScript                      40             17              9           2277
Markdown                         2            238              0            679
Python                           5             91             61            261
TeX                              1             18              0            145
SVG                             15              0              0            115
CSS                              3             13              0             60
HTML                             1              3             20             25
Bourne Shell                     1              3              0             13
TOML                             1              3              0             12
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                           156            775            136          37655
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 2366

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.26116/techreg.2020.010 is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.5156931 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.1126/science.1197872 may be a valid DOI for title: Ensuring the data-rich future of the social sciences
- 10.1080/13645579.2019.1682840 may be a valid DOI for title: Digital methods in a post-API environment
- 10.4324/9781003206972-2 may be a valid DOI for title: After the ‘APIcalypse’: Social media platforms and their fight against critical scholarly research
- 10.31235/osf.io/56f4q may be a valid DOI for title: Computational research in the post-API age
- 10.5117/ccr2022.2.002.boes may be a valid DOI for title: A framework for privacy preserving digital trace data collection through data donation
- 10.31219/osf.io/krqb9 may be a valid DOI for title: Promises and pitfalls of social media data donations
- 10.3233/ds-210035 may be a valid DOI for title: Automatic de-identification of data download packages
- 10.1177/07591063211061754 may be a valid DOI for title: Which is your favorite music genre? A validity comparison of Facebook data and survey data
- 10.31235/osf.io/xjk6t may be a valid DOI for title: OSD2F: An open-source data donation framework
- 10.1016/j.patter.2022.100444 may be a valid DOI for title: Privacy-preserving local analysis of digital trace data: A proof-of-concept

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

:warning: An error happened when generating the pdf.

[oliviaguest]

@osorensen do you have capacity for this? ☺️

[osorensen]

@editorialbot assign @osorensen as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @osorensen is now the editor

[osorensen]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

:warning: An error happened when generating the pdf.

[osorensen]

@lauraboeschoten could you please add your ORCID so we are able to generate the pdf, cf. https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/actions/runs/5267834445/jobs/9523623535#step:3:94

[lauraboeschoten]

Hi! Sorry, indeed I completely forgot to add them. They are included now in the version on the branch ( https://github.com/eyra/port/tree/d3I-jboss-paper/D3I_JOSS_paper)

Op wo 14 jun 2023 om 16:33 schreef Øystein Sørensen < @.***>:

@lauraboeschoten https://github.com/lauraboeschoten could you please add your ORCID so we are able to generate the pdf, cf. https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/actions/runs/5267834445/jobs/9523623535#step:3:94

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/5558#issuecomment-1591342763, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFJ2C62XBZBBEKWRNZAN2FLXLHDTHANCNFSM6AAAAAAZGGPLWI . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

[lauraboeschoten]

Dear editor, Potential reviewers from the list could be anibalsolon or Sirjla since they are familiar with elixir. Furthermore, based on familiarity with elixir and/or some conceptual knowledge about the idea of data donation, I would suggest the following: cskaandorp, chartgerink (also editor at JOSS) and NiekPas . Kind regards, Laura Boeschoten

Op wo 14 jun 2023 om 13:18 schreef The Open Journals editorial robot < @.***>:

Submitting author: @lauraboeschoten https://github.com/lauraboeschoten (Laura Boeschoten http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3536-0474) Repository: https://github.com/eyra/port Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): d3I-jboss-paper Version: v1.0.1 Editor: Pending Reviewers: Pending Managing EiC: Olivia Guest Status

[image: status] https://joss.theoj.org/papers/11922a83c07ff2fc0a2cb70d962984aa

Status badge code:

HTML: Markdown:

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @lauraboeschoten https://github.com/lauraboeschoten. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@lauraboeschoten https://github.com/lauraboeschoten if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread (without tagging them with an @). You can search the list of people https://reviewers.joss.theoj.org/lookup that have already agreed to review and may be suitable for this submission.

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/5558, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFJ2C64SRMO6O7RFDPKRSILXLGM2FANCNFSM6AAAAAAZGGPLWI . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

[osorensen]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

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

[osorensen]

👋 @anibalsolon @Sirjla @cskaandorp @NiekPas, would any of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html

[osorensen]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

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

[osorensen]

👋 @thegargiulian, @KennethEnevoldsen, @suyashdb, would any of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html

[KennethEnevoldsen]

Thanks for your consideration. I have two other pending reviews and this one falls outside my main area so at the moment I am not able to find the time to review this.

[thegargiulian]

Thanks for your consideration! Unfortunately, after taking a quick look, this package falls outside my areas of expertise and I don't think I will be able to provide a comprehensive review of all parts of the software.

[osorensen]

Ok, @KennethEnevoldsen and @thegargiulian. Thanks a lot for responding!

[osorensen]

:wave: @kaustavbhattacharjee @praenubilus @JoyMitra @aivodji, would any of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html

[kaustavbhattacharjee]

@osorensen Sure. Please let me know the timeline for this.

[osorensen]

Thanks @kaustavbhattacharjee! It would be great if you could start your review within six weeks. I'll open the review once we get one more reviewer.

[osorensen]

@editorialbot add @kaustavbhattacharjee as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@kaustavbhattacharjee added to the reviewers list!

[osorensen]

👋 @swyoung @naltun @leonardojaneis @pgadige, would any of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html

[leonardojaneis]

Hi @osorensen, after reviewing the details of the invitation and considering the scope of the project, I am pleased to accept the position of reviewer.

[naltun]

@osorensen I am happy to help, if still needed.

[osorensen]

@editorialbot add @naltun as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@naltun added to the reviewers list!

[osorensen]

@editorialbot add @leonardojaneis as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@leonardojaneis added to the reviewers list!

[osorensen]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/5596.