[PRE REVIEW]: hf_hydrodata: A Python package for accessing hydrologic simulations and observations across the United States

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@amy-defnet<!--end-author-handle-- (Amy Defnet) Repository: https://github.com/hydroframe/hf_hydrodata Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v1.1.0 Editor: !--editor-->@rwegener2<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @thodson-usgs, @alessandroamaranto Managing EiC: Kristen Thyng

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/0f71e8275dbff415d2f76e1089c34dc8"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/0f71e8275dbff415d2f76e1089c34dc8/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/0f71e8275dbff415d2f76e1089c34dc8/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/0f71e8275dbff415d2f76e1089c34dc8)

Author instructions

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

@amy-defnet 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]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1126/science.aaf7891 is OK
- 10.5194/gmd-14-7223-2021 is OK
- 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2023.130294 is OK
- 10.1109/MCSE.2011.37 is OK
- 10.5281/zenodo.3509134 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- None

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.88  T=0.17 s (362.6 files/s, 120342.1 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          19           1560           2363           6472
reStructuredText                24            256            426            416
Jupyter Notebook                 6              0           8203            256
Markdown                         2             72              0            163
YAML                             2             56             12            119
TeX                              1              4              0             53
TOML                             1              6              2             33
Bourne Shell                     3              1              5             28
DOS Batch                        1              8              1             27
make                             1              4              5             11
HTML                             1              0              0              7
CSS                              1              0              0              6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            62           1967          11017           7591
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

gitinspector failed to run statistical information for the repository

[editorialbot]

Wordcount for paper.md is 986

[editorialbot]

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

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

Integrated hydrologic model development and postprocessing for GSFLOW using pyGSFLOW Submitting author: @jlarsen-usgs Handling editor: @crvernon (Active) Reviewers: @thurber, @mdbartos, @mdbartos Similarity score: 0.8383

HydroMT: Automated and reproducible model building and analysis Submitting author: @dirkeilander Handling editor: @elbeejay (Active) Reviewers: @JannisHoch, @mcflugen, <s>@LejoFlores</s> Similarity score: 0.8299

hddtools: Hydrological Data Discovery Tools Submitting author: @cvitolo Handling editor: @arfon (Active) Reviewers: @karthik Similarity score: 0.8249

HRDS: A Python package for hierarchical raster datasets Submitting author: @jhill1 Handling editor: @kthyng (Active) Reviewers: @edoddridge, @PythonCHB Similarity score: 0.8232

NeuralHydrology --- A Python library for Deep Learning research in hydrology Submitting author: @kratzert Handling editor: @elbeejay (Active) Reviewers: @ammilten, @chuckaustin, @jhamman Similarity score: 0.8214

⚠️ 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]

Hi @amy-defnet and thanks for your submission! We have a backlog of submissions so I will add this to our waitlist. In the meantime, please suggest 5 reviewers from the database listed above or your own (non-conflicted) extended network. Their github handles are most useful to receive but please don't use "@" to reference them since it will prematurely ping them. Thanks for your patience.

[amy-defnet]

Hi @kthyng! Thank you so much for the quick update. I am working with my team to be able to suggest 5 reviewers to you and I will update this thread once we have those.

[amy-defnet]

Hi @kthyng - my team suggests the following as potential reviewers (as their github handle) from the JOSS reviewer database: rreinecke, JannisHoch, kellykochanski, dvalters, jlarsen-usgs. Thanks!

[kthyng]

@rwegener2 would you be up for editing this submission?

[kthyng]

@editorialbot invite @rwegener2 as editor

[editorialbot]

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

[rwegener2]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @rwegener2 is now the editor

[rwegener2]

:wave: @shulele would 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

[rwegener2]

:wave: @thodson-usgs would 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

[thodson-usgs]

Sure, this is right up my alley.

[rwegener2]

Lovely, thank you! I'll add you as a reviewer. Once we get an additional reviewer you will get another set of notifications and at that point a review ticket will be opened for you to begin your review.

[rwegener2]

@editorialbot add @thodson-usgs as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@thodson-usgs added to the reviewers list!

[rwegener2]

👋 @puruckertom would 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

[rwegener2]

👋🏻 @jmp75, would 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

[rwegener2]

👋🏻 @raoulcollenteur, would 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

[rwegener2]

👋🏻 @alessandroamaranto, would 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

[alessandroamaranto]

Sure!

Ale

On Mon, Apr 15, 2024, 21:04 Rachel Wegener @.***> wrote:

👋🏻 @alessandroamaranto https://github.com/alessandroamaranto, would 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

— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6378#issuecomment-2057610807, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADJOC4PKDECAQVTDIB3GLY3Y5QQERAVCNFSM6AAAAABDPZXWRGVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDANJXGYYTAOBQG4 . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>

[rwegener2]

Great, thanks @alessandroamaranto!

[rwegener2]

@editorialbot add @alessandroamaranto as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@alessandroamaranto added to the reviewers list!

[rwegener2]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6623.