Closed editorialbot closed 5 months ago
Hello @gkthiruvathukal, here are the things you can ask me to do:
# List all available commands
@editorialbot commands
# Add to this issue's reviewers list
@editorialbot add @username as reviewer
# Remove from this issue's reviewers list
@editorialbot remove @username from reviewers
# Get a list of all editors's GitHub handles
@editorialbot list editors
# Assign a user as the editor of this submission
@editorialbot assign @username as editor
# Remove the editor assigned to this submission
@editorialbot remove editor
# Remind an author, a reviewer or the editor to return to a review after a
# certain period of time (supported units days and weeks)
@editorialbot remind @reviewer in 2 weeks
# Check the references of the paper for missing DOIs
@editorialbot check references
# Perform checks on the repository
@editorialbot check repository
# Adds a checklist for the reviewer using this command
@editorialbot generate my checklist
# Set a value for version
@editorialbot set v1.0.0 as version
# Set a value for branch
@editorialbot set joss-paper as branch
# Set a value for repository
@editorialbot set https://github.com/organization/repo as repository
# Set a value for the archive DOI
@editorialbot set set 10.5281/zenodo.6861996 as archive
# Mention the EiCs for the correct track
@editorialbot ping track-eic
# Reject paper
@editorialbot reject
# Withdraw paper
@editorialbot withdraw
# Invite an editor to edit a submission (sending them an email)
@editorialbot invite @(.*) as editor
# Generates the pdf paper
@editorialbot generate pdf
# Recommends the submission for acceptance
@editorialbot recommend-accept
# Accept and publish the paper
@editorialbot accept
# Update data on an accepted/published paper
@editorialbot reaccept
# Generates a LaTeX preprint file
@editorialbot generate preprint
# Flag submission with questionable scope
@editorialbot query scope
# Get a link to the complete list of reviewers
@editorialbot list reviewers
# Creates a post-review checklist with editor and authors tasks
@editorialbot create post-review checklist
# Open the review issue
@editorialbot start review
@editorialbot list reviewers
Please log in the JOSS Reviewers site to search through the list of current reviewers.
@editorialbot generate pdf
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
Five most similar historical JOSS papers:
GEMMI: A library for structural biology
Submitting author: @wojdyr
Handling editor: @kellyrowland (Active)
Reviewers: @jamesrhester, @dominiquesydow
Similarity score: 0.8250
GAMA: Genetic Automated Machine learning Assistant
Submitting author: @PGijsbers
Handling editor: @arokem (Retired)
Reviewers: @jsgalan
Similarity score: 0.8188
GNU Data Language 1.0: a free/libre and open-source drop-in replacement for IDL/PV-WAVE
Submitting author: @pjb7687
Handling editor: @gkthiruvathukal (Active)
Reviewers: @mgalloy, @mohawk2
Similarity score: 0.8151
GPP, the Generic Preprocessor
Submitting author: @Logological
Handling editor: @gkthiruvathukal (Active)
Reviewers: @Smattr, @drj11
Similarity score: 0.8146
imager: an R package for image processing based on CImg
Submitting author: @dahtah
Handling editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman (Active)
Reviewers: @jeroen
Similarity score: 0.8128
⚠️ 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 considering asking the reviewers of these papers to review again for JOSS.
@jeroen Are you willing to contribute a review for this JOSS submission?
@mohawk2 Are you willing to contribute a review for this JOSS submission? (I need two reviewers.)
@jsgalan Are you willing to contribute a review for this JOSS submission?
@danielskatz Sorry, but I'm having trouble getting reviewers. We may have to pause for a bit. I'm going to try two more.
@jamesrhester and @dominiquesydow: are either or both of you willing to review this JOSS submission?
Happy to review this, bearing in mind that I'm not an image processing expert, have just messed around a bit with image processing tools.
I'm not sure if I can help at this point, but feel free to ask me any questions if any.
Hi @gkthiruvathukal, my sincere apologies, I am afraid this topic is too far outside of my expertise to be a useful reviewer.
@jamesrhester It isn't required to have deep expertise to review JOSS submissions. Having prior experience with image processing tools is a plus. The goal is to evaluate that the software does what the authors say it does and meets the JOSS requirements. I'm going to go ahead and assign you and see if I can find a second reviewer in the meantime.
@editorialbot add @jamesrhester as reviewer
@jamesrhester added to the reviewers list!
@jsgalan are you willing to review this JOSS submission?
Just to note, I don't believe I can start the review until all reviewers are in place and a new issue is created.
👋 @gkthiruvathukal - this submission seems stuck - can you help move it forward?
@danielskatz Apologies for the delays on my end. The past few weeks have been super busy with my chairperson duties. I'll try to keep this moving.
Working to get a second reviewer now.
@Smattr Would you be willing to help with this JOSS submission? I need a second reviewer in order to proceed with review.
@gkthiruvathukal - thanks. We usually recommend to editors that they ask a few different potential reviewers at a time, rather than doing it serially, if possible.
@danielskatz See above! I did ask multiple. One already responded in the affirmative. (Thanks, @jamesrhester!)
Thanks for considering me, but unfortunately my time’s full for the next little while. If you can’t find anyone else, I should have some time in May.
@Smattr Can I go ahead and add you? I'm willing to work with your timeframe. I'd rather get things moving than not have them moving at all.
i can review. I'm not exactly expert, but i have written the pure-Python PNG module PyPNG https://gitlab.com/drj11/pypng
@gkthiruvathukal - it seems like you can add @drj11 and @Smattr , as we're getting close to May, and then start the review?
@danielskatz Sorry for the delay on this one. Got things going and then hit a wall of work (again).
@editorialbot add @drj11
I'm sorry human, I don't understand that. You can see what commands I support by typing:
@editorialbot commands
@Smattr It is almost May, so I am going to add you! Please take the time you need. @drj11 Thank you for also being willing!
@editorialbot add @Smattr as reviewer
@Smattr added to the reviewers list!
@editorialbot add @drj11 as reviewer
@drj11 added to the reviewers list!
@editorialbot start review
OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6618.
Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@dtschump<!--end-author-handle-- (David Tschumperlé) Repository: https://github.com/GreycLab/gmic Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): joss Version: 3.3.2 Editor: !--editor-->@gkthiruvathukal<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @jamesrhester, @Smattr, @drj11 Managing EiC: Daniel S. Katz
Status
Status badge code:
Author instructions
Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @dtschump. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.
@dtschump 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: