[PRE REVIEW]: goFlux: A user-friendly way to calculate GHG fluxes yourself, regardless of user experience

editorialbot commented 7 months ago

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@qepanna@arfon<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @Schuch666, @shubhamjain15, @hahsan1 Managing EiC: Kristen Thyng

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/d760de0a609420569b011ed2df3d0b8c"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/d760de0a609420569b011ed2df3d0b8c/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/d760de0a609420569b011ed2df3d0b8c/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/d760de0a609420569b011ed2df3d0b8c)

Author instructions

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

@qepanna 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 7 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 7 months ago

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.04 s (1009.0 files/s, 279285.7 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R                               34            565           3435           3273
JSON                             1              0              0           2597
Markdown                         2            173              0            653
TeX                              1              6              0             70
YAML                             1              1              4             18
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            39            745           3439           6611
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

editorialbot commented 7 months ago

Wordcount for paper.md is 796

editorialbot commented 7 months ago

Failed to discover a valid open source license

editorialbot commented 7 months ago

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

OK DOIs

- 10.2136/sssaj1981.03615995004500020017x is OK
- 10.1111/j.1365-2389.2010.01291.x is OK
- 10.1371/journal.pone.0200876 is OK
- 10.21105/joss.01751 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

editorialbot commented 7 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 7 months ago

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

eixport: An R package to export emissions to atmospheric models Submitting author: @ibarraespinosa Handling editor: @leeper (Retired) Reviewers: @jhollist Similarity score: 0.8281

Flux: Elegant machine learning with Julia Submitting author: @MikeInnes Handling editor: @Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman (Active) Reviewers: @ysimillides Similarity score: 0.8180

EmissV: an R package to create vehicular and other emissions for air quality models Submitting author: @Schuch666 Handling editor: @arfon (Active) Reviewers: @nuest, @benmarwick Similarity score: 0.8147

gdess: A framework for evaluating simulated atmospheric CO₂ in Earth System Models Submitting author: @dkauf42 Handling editor: @dhhagan (Active) Reviewers: @slayoo, @simonom Similarity score: 0.8126

flux-data-qaqc: A Python Package for Energy Balance Closure and Post-Processing of Eddy Flux Data Submitting author: @JohnVolk Handling editor: @pdebuyl (Active) Reviewers: @ashwinvis, @dgketchum Similarity score: 0.8117

⚠️ 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.

kthyng commented 7 months ago

Hi @Qepanna and thanks for your submission. A couple of initial items:

We require an OSI-approved license to review submissions.
I don't see any tests directory in your repo but we require some way of testing: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html#tests
I worry about the state of the package given your "beta" comment in the readme and docs. This seems to indicate the package isn't ready for review by JOSS.

Qepanna commented 7 months ago

Hi Kristen,

Thank you for considering my software. I have addressed the following:

I added a LICENSE file to the repository
I added the following test files in the .github/workflow directory:
- check-standard.yaml
- test-coverage.yaml
- pkgdown.yaml
- pr-commands.yaml
The package is ready and fully functioning, but since it is meant to work with many versions of different instruments, errors that I cannot anticipate may still occur. I have modified the statement from “BETA VERSION” to “FIRST RELEASE”.

Best regards, Karelle Rheault

Karelle Rheault PhD candidate

University of Copenhagen Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management Section of Forest, Nature and Biomass Rolighedsvej 23 Frederiksberg C

DIR +45 35 32 43 04 @.**@.>

[Logo for Københavns Universitet]

How we protect personal datahttps://informationssikkerhed.ku.dk/english/protection-of-information-privacy/privacy-policy/ LinkedIn Profilehttps://www.linkedin.com/in/karelle-rheault-063842105/?challengeId=AQFSLWms_eH8SgAAAX_gFPGWCFmZ6_X8zLLTJoLuKaedokcA1gR7aPiAHk6XsXDSWeg2UxWeFqKwogNJfkPqmWUQ04uIRcrkrQ&submissionId=047dbc84-f778-e116-d099-3ab935bd880a

From: Kristen Thyng @.> Sent: Tuesday, January 2, 2024 7:42 PM To: openjournals/joss-reviews @.> Cc: Karelle Rheault @.>; Mention @.> Subject: Re: [openjournals/joss-reviews] [PRE REVIEW]: goFlux: A user-friendly way to calculate GHG fluxes yourself, regardless of user experience (Issue #6177)

Hi @Qepannahttps://github.com/Qepanna and thanks for your submission. A couple of initial items:

We require an OSI-approved license to review submissions.
I don't see any tests directory in your repo but we require some way of testing: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html#tests https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html#tests
I worry about the state of the package given your "beta" comment in the readme and docs. This seems to indicate the package isn't ready for review by JOSS.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6177#issuecomment-1874405182, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AP45XA25OSS5GMEKB7DIQILYMRII3AVCNFSM6AAAAABBKMYVXOVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQNZUGQYDKMJYGI. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

kthyng commented 7 months ago

@Qepanna Regarding tests, I mean I was looking for a tests directory that runs a variety of tests to make sure that the code is performing correctly and accurately. I see you added some workflows, but are there any tests of this nature in the package? All or at least most functionality of the code base should be checked by tests that can be run by you or a user.

Also I'd recommend you remove or heavily reduce the content in your readme rather than say it is out of date. It's typical to put the basics there (brief description of functionality and installation instructions or similar) then point to the full docs that are up to date. Then you don't have any redundancy or getting out of date between two pages.

Qepanna commented 7 months ago

Hi Kristen,

I’m sorry I’m new to GitHub and creating a package. I do not know what you are referring to. One of the workflows performs a “R-CMD-check”, which tests all the examples provided in the functions’ documentations. If this is not what was asked, would you kindly provide me with an example of how to create a test directory and what it should contain.

Thank you for your patience.

In the meantime, I modified the README file to fit your recommendations.

Best regards, Karelle

From: Kristen Thyng @.> Sent: Wednesday, January 3, 2024 4:26 PM To: openjournals/joss-reviews @.> Cc: Karelle Rheault @.>; Mention @.> Subject: Re: [openjournals/joss-reviews] [PRE REVIEW]: goFlux: A user-friendly way to calculate GHG fluxes yourself, regardless of user experience (Issue #6177)

@Qepannahttps://github.com/Qepanna Regarding tests, I mean I was looking for a tests directory that runs a variety of tests to make sure that the code is performing correctly and accurately. I see you added some workflows, but are there any tests of this nature in the package? All or at least most functionality of the code base should be checked by tests that can be run by you or a user.

Also I'd recommend you remove or heavily reduce the content in your readme rather than say it is out of date. It's typical to put the basics there (brief description of functionality and installation instructions or similar) then point to the full docs that are up to date. Then you don't have any redundancy or getting out of date between two pages.

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6177#issuecomment-1875547994, or unsubscribehttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AP45XAZNJCGRARS2XIYNLJDYMV2CLAVCNFSM6AAAAABBKMYVXOVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQNZVGU2DOOJZGQ. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

kthyng commented 7 months ago

@Qepanna Ah! This sounds like a misunderstanding on my part — I am not very familiar with R package structure. My apologies for the confusion.

I'll add this submission to our waitlist now, thank you for your patience.

kthyng commented 5 months ago

Hi @RMeli and welcome to JOSS! Any chance you'd be comfortable enough to edit this submission? I see that it is not immediately in your domain but you are also the only editor with chemistry expertise and this submission has been waiting for awhile. If not, no worries!

kthyng commented 5 months ago

@editorialbot invite @RMeli as editor

editorialbot commented 5 months ago

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

RMeli commented 5 months ago

Hi @kthyng! Unfortunately I'm not knowledgeable in this branch of chemistry, nor R. So I don't think I would be suited to edit this submission. But if it's the only way forward, I can have a look and try to find suitable reviewers.

kthyng commented 5 months ago

@RMeli ok thanks, I'll keep trying to find someone.

arfon commented 5 months ago

@editorialbot assign me as editor

editorialbot commented 5 months ago

Assigned! @arfon is now the editor

arfon commented 5 months ago

@Qepanna – thanks for your submission to JOSS. Could you take a look a this list of potential reviewers and identify a few people who would be good candidates to review this submission?

Qepanna commented 5 months ago

Hi @arfon, I believe anyone with the area of expertise "Earth Sciences and Ecology" and knows the language R could be a good candidate. Here is my selection of a few candidates who also have some relevant key words in their topic area: @chenyangkang @shubhamjain15 @david-yannick @nmstreethran @hahsan1

I hope this helps.

arfon commented 5 months ago

@ibarraespinosa @Schuch666 @dkauf42 @hahsan1 :wave: would any of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? The submission under consideration is goFlux: A user-friendly way to calculate GHG fluxes yourself, regardless of user experience

The review process at JOSS is unique: it takes place in a GitHub issue, is open, and author-reviewer-editor conversations are encouraged. You can learn more about the process in these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html

Based on your experience, we think you might be able to provide a great review of this submission. Please let me know if you think you can help us out!

Many thanks Arfon

Schuch666 commented 5 months ago

Hello @arfon ,

Yes it work for me, I'm happy to help with this review.

Let me know the time-line

Thank you, Daniel

ibarraespinosa commented 5 months ago

hi @arfon , I'm reviewing gcamreport https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/5975#issuecomment-1953097401. Once I have finished I can help with this

dkauf42 commented 5 months ago

Hi @arfon, lacking familiarity with R, I don't think I'm up for reviewing this. Please do keep me (or via my other GitHub handle, @danielfromearth) in mind for other reviews though!

arfon commented 5 months ago

Yes it work for me, I'm happy to help with this review.

Thanks @Schuch666 – we ideally would want the reviews to be complete within ~6 weeks which means providing initial feedback in 2-3 weeks. Does that sound OK?

hi @arfon , I'm reviewing gcamreport https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/5975#issuecomment-1953097401. Once I have finished I can help with this

Thanks @ibarraespinosa – I failed to notice you're working on another review for us right now. I'll keep looking for a second reviewer but may come back to you later if I don't identify anyone else. Thanks!

arfon commented 5 months ago

@shubhamjain15 @david-yannick @nmstreethran - 👋 would any of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS? The submission under consideration is goFlux: A user-friendly way to calculate GHG fluxes yourself, regardless of user experience

The review process at JOSS is unique: it takes place in a GitHub issue, is open, and author-reviewer-editor conversations are encouraged. You can learn more about the process in these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html

Based on your experience, we think you might be able to provide a great review of this submission. Please let me know if you think you can help us out!

Many thanks Arfon

nmstreethran commented 5 months ago

@arfon I'm currently reviewing another submission. I should be done in a week if you still need someone to help out then.

shubhamjain15 commented 5 months ago

@arfon Yes, I would be happy to review this submission.

hahsan1 commented 5 months ago

@arfon If you are still in need of reviewers I am available.

arfon commented 5 months ago

@editorialbot add @Schuch666 as reviewer

editorialbot commented 5 months ago

@Schuch666 added to the reviewers list!

arfon commented 5 months ago

@editorialbot add @shubhamjain15 as reviewer

editorialbot commented 5 months ago

@shubhamjain15 added to the reviewers list!

arfon commented 5 months ago

@editorialbot add @hahsan1 as reviewer

editorialbot commented 5 months ago

@hahsan1 added to the reviewers list!

arfon commented 5 months ago

@arfon I'm currently reviewing another submission. I should be done in a week if you still need someone to help out then.

Thanks @nmstreethran – it looks like we have plenty of volunteers here to so I'll save you the additional effort at this time, but thank you for being willing to help out!

arfon commented 5 months ago

@editorialbot start review

editorialbot commented 5 months ago

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6393.

arfon commented 5 months ago

@Schuch666, @shubhamjain15, @hahsan1, @Qepanna – see you all over in #6393 where the actual review will take place!

openjournals / joss-reviews

[PRE REVIEW]: goFlux: A user-friendly way to calculate GHG fluxes yourself, regardless of user experience #6177

Status