search

openjournals / joss-reviews

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

[REVIEW]: SitCoM: Modular framework for the integration of (extreme) events and their impacts in Unity #6458

Closed editorialbot closed 4 months ago

editorialbot commented 6 months ago

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@ruedi99ms<!--end-author-handle-- (Niklas Suhre) Repository: https://github.com/ruedi99ms/SitCoM Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: 1.0 Editor: !--editor-->@osorensen<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @luxaritas, @ApocalyVec Archive: Pending

Status

status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/afd7fb1d287fc1e36cd71cf4cae79e29"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/afd7fb1d287fc1e36cd71cf4cae79e29/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/afd7fb1d287fc1e36cd71cf4cae79e29/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/afd7fb1d287fc1e36cd71cf4cae79e29)

Reviewers and authors:

Please avoid lengthy details of difficulties in the review thread. Instead, please create a new issue in the target repository and link to those issues (especially acceptance-blockers) by leaving comments in the review thread below. (For completists: if the target issue tracker is also on GitHub, linking the review thread in the issue or vice versa will create corresponding breadcrumb trails in the link target.)

Reviewer instructions & questions

@luxaritas & @ApocalyVec, your review will be checklist based. Each of you will have a separate checklist that you should update when carrying out your review. First of all you need to run this command in a separate comment to create the checklist:

@editorialbot generate my checklist

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @osorensen know.

✨ Please start on your review when you are able, and be sure to complete your review in the next six weeks, at the very latest ✨

Checklists

📝 Checklist for @ApocalyVec

📝 Checklist for @luxaritas

editorialbot commented 6 months ago

Hello humans, 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 6 months ago 
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- 10.1890/1540-9295(2007)5[365:ANGOCE]2.0.CO;2 is OK
- 10.1016/j.trd.2021.102770 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- 10.1093/wentk/9780190866112.003.0002 may be a valid DOI for title: Extreme Weather and Climate Change
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Extreme weather and climate change: Understanding ...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Spectra Whitepaper: Building a Sustainable, Livabl...

INVALID DOIs

- None
editorialbot commented 6 months ago

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=4.22 s (857.9 files/s, 155609.7 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
C#                            2832          68027          75167         327286
Unity-Prefab                    60              0              0          70407
JSON                           136             23              0          63471
Markdown                       459           7942             16          19409
C# Generated                     6            896            502          10611
HLSL                            21            702             98           2646
Objective-C                     12            287            115           1773
YAML                             7              3             18           1289
C/C++ Header                    62            334            725            961
PO File                          1            456            405            946
Objective-C++                    7            139             21            580
SVG                              5              2              2            499
XML                             10              0              0            461
C++                              1            103             30            344
TeX                              1             11              1             65
CMake                            1              1              0             13
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                          3621          78926          77100         500761
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

    15  ruedi99ms
editorialbot commented 6 months ago

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 697

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

editorialbot commented 6 months ago

License info:

✅ License found: MIT License (Valid open source OSI approved license)

editorialbot commented 6 months ago

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

ApocalyVec commented 5 months ago

Review checklist for @ApocalyVec

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

luxaritas commented 5 months ago

Review checklist for @luxaritas

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

Functionality

Documentation

Software paper

osorensen commented 5 months ago

@luxaritas and @ApocalyVec, I just wanted to give you a gentle reminder of this review. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. And if you have any suggested changes or improvements to the software, you're welcome to open issues in the source repository or comment here.

luxaritas commented 5 months ago

Thanks for the nudge - just took an initial look through this.

Before I go any further, I want to raise a concern around JOSS's "substantial scholarly effort" requirement.

From my understanding, the work presented here is principally in Assets/_SitCoM, which includes:

I appreciate the value proposition here in being able to create "plug and play" simulations for visualizing extreme events and their impacts. However it doesn't seem to me that the scope as-implemented matches the size JOSS requires. Being mostly generating a UI of switches which conditionally enable objects/object behavior, this feels like it falls under "minor utility package" territory and does not appear to me to be something that would take >= 3 months of time in the context of spinning up a new unity project that needs some UI to do something similar.

luxaritas commented 5 months ago

NB: The "real" lines of code here appears to be <1000, which should be flagged according to JOSS guidelines. Most of the auto-identified code is library code

osorensen commented 5 months ago

Thanks a lot for your feedback @luxaritas.

@ruedi99ms, @luxaritas and @ApocalyVec, I pause the review for now, until the JOSS editorial team has evaluated whether the submission is within scope.

osorensen commented 5 months ago

@editorialbot commands

editorialbot commented 5 months ago

Hello @osorensen, 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

# 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

# Run checks and provide information on the repository and the paper file
@editorialbot check repository

# Check the references of the paper for missing DOIs
@editorialbot check references

# Generates the pdf paper
@editorialbot generate pdf

# Recommends the submission for acceptance
@editorialbot recommend-accept

# 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
osorensen commented 5 months ago

@editorialbot query scope

editorialbot commented 5 months ago

Submission flagged for editorial review.

oliviaguest commented 4 months ago

@editorialbot reject

editorialbot commented 4 months ago

Paper rejected.

oliviaguest commented 4 months ago

Dear author(s), @ruedi99ms, I am sorry to say that JOSS requires certain conditions to be met for this to remain under review, such as the requiremnt to meet our idea for Substantial scholarly effort, which includes but is not limited to the following (see more at previous link):

As a rule of thumb, JOSS’ minimum allowable contribution should represent not less than three months of work for an individual. Some factors that may be considered by editors and reviewers when judging effort include:

  • Total lines of code (LOC). Submissions under 1000 LOC will usually be flagged, those under 300 LOC will be desk rejected.

I am sorry and I hope this does not deter you from choosing JOSS in the future.

Best, Olivia

oliviaguest commented 4 months ago

@luxaritas, @ApocalyVec, @osorensen thank you for the valuable contribution you have made even if in this case it did not result in a publication. Sorry again to @ruedi99ms for the less than idea news.