openjournals / joss-reviews

Reviews for the Journal of Open Source Software
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
703 stars 36 forks source link

[PRE REVIEW]: pyAPDT: An adaptive Polygon Detection tool #5926

Closed editorialbot closed 10 months ago

editorialbot commented 11 months ago

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@Jeschenfelder<!--end-author-handle-- (Jonas Eschenfelder) Repository: https://github.com/Jeschenfelder/PolygonDetection Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: 1.0 Editor: Pending Reviewers: Pending Managing EiC: Kristen Thyng

Status

status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/9e340defd8d8e60ff9782344be2b8882"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/9e340defd8d8e60ff9782344be2b8882/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/9e340defd8d8e60ff9782344be2b8882/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/9e340defd8d8e60ff9782344be2b8882)

Author instructions

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

@Jeschenfelder 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 commented 11 months 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 commands

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

@editorialbot generate pdf
editorialbot commented 11 months ago
Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.10 s (521.7 files/s, 226743.6 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JavaScript                      14           2424           2495           9165
SVG                              1              0              0           2671
HTML                             9            215             27           1447
CSS                              6            339             58           1314
Python                           8            271            335            682
XML                              1              0              0            670
YAML                             2              0              0            506
TeX                              1             11              0            172
Markdown                         2             21              0             91
DOS Batch                        1              8              1             26
reStructuredText                 7             13             35             19
make                             1              4              7              9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            53           3306           2958          16772
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository
editorialbot commented 11 months ago

Wordcount for paper.md is 1810

editorialbot commented 11 months ago

Failed to discover a valid open source license

editorialbot commented 11 months ago
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1029/2008JE003273 is OK
- 10.1038/ngeo2674 is OK
- 10.1073/pnas.2212171120 is OK
- 10.3390/rs13040558 is OK
- 10.3390/rs13040558 is OK
- 10.3390/rs10091487 is OK
- 10.1002/ppp.1810 is OK
- 10.1002/ppp.2123 is OK
- 10.5194/tc-12-3589-2018 is OK
- 10.3390/rs13163098 is OK
- 10.7717/peerj.453 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None
editorialbot commented 11 months ago

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

editorialbot commented 11 months ago

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

Pyoints: A Python package for point cloud, voxel and raster processing. Submitting author: @laempy Handling editor: @lheagy (Retired) Reviewers: @kbevers, @scivision Similarity score: 0.8112

PolSAR tools: A QGIS plugin for generating SAR descriptors Submitting author: @Narayana-Rao Handling editor: @hugoledoux (Active) Reviewers: @liberostelios, @HenrikJanPersson Similarity score: 0.8030

TessPy: a python package for geographical tessellation Submitting author: @siavash-saki Handling editor: @martinfleis (Active) Reviewers: @jGaboardi, @BenjMy Similarity score: 0.8015

PyLithics: A Python package for stone tool analysis Submitting author: @JasonGellis Handling editor: @Nikoleta-v3 (Active) Reviewers: @MichaelHoltonPrice, @steko Similarity score: 0.7942

pyveg: A Python package for analysing the time evolution of patterned vegetation using Google Earth Engine Submitting author: @samvanstroud Handling editor: @usethedata (Retired) Reviewers: @arbennett, @usethedata Similarity score: 0.7936

⚠️ Note to editors: If these papers look like they might be a good match, click through to the review issue for that paper and invite one or more of the authors before before considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.

kthyng commented 11 months ago

Hi @Jeschenfelder and thanks for your submission. I'm going to ping the greater editorial board to take a look at it because the number of lines of code is relatively small (<1000). This will take 1-2 weeks, thanks for your patience.

kthyng commented 11 months ago

@editorialbot query scope

editorialbot commented 11 months ago

Submission flagged for editorial review.

kthyng commented 10 months ago

Hi @Jeschenfelder. Unfortunately the editorial board determined this submission is a bit too small to be in scope. However, they wanted to encourage you to think about resubmitting in the future if the scope of this package expanded, or if development continued substantially in time. Thank you for your time.

kthyng commented 10 months ago

@editorialbot reject

editorialbot commented 10 months ago

Paper rejected.