[REVIEW]: HealpixMPI.jl: an MPI-parallel implementation of the Healpix tessellation scheme in Julia

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@LeeoBianchi<!--end-author-handle-- (Leo Alessandro Bianchi) Repository: https://github.com/LeeoBianchi/HealpixMPI.jl Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): JOSS-paper Version: v1.0.0 Editor: !--editor-->@prashjha<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @marcobonici, @baxmittens Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.11192548

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/f012d3aa6c7cd644b8b9ecbe2c5a0aef"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/f012d3aa6c7cd644b8b9ecbe2c5a0aef/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/f012d3aa6c7cd644b8b9ecbe2c5a0aef/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/f012d3aa6c7cd644b8b9ecbe2c5a0aef)

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

@marcobonici & @baxmittens, 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 @prashjha 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 @marcobonici

📝 Checklist for @baxmittens

[prashjha]

Hi @marcobonici and @baxmittens, thank you for reviewing this submission and giving your recommendations.

[prashjha]

@LeeoBianchi, while checking references, I noticed some citations appear to be missing DOIs. Can you check?

[prashjha]

@LeeoBianchi, I am reading the draft and will let you know if I have any suggestions.

Meanwhile, could you please archive (if not done already) the release using zenodo and provide the archive reference so that I can associate it with your JOSS submission? Also, please ensure that the zenodo archive's title matches this JOSS article's title.

If you have updated a version of your code, let me know, and I can update it here.

[prashjha]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

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

[prashjha]

Hi @LeeoBianchi, I just have one suggestion on Line 86: use "employing". Please also read my earlier comment here and respond. Thanks.

[LeeoBianchi]

Hi @prashjha, I have updated the paper according to what you suggested. For what concerns Zenodo, should I just upload the entire repo as a .zip? It also asks for a DOI which I of course don't have yet, should I just go on without it?

[baxmittens]

@LeeoBianchi Just let zenodo generate a doi for you. the zenodo doi and joss doi are different things. (I am like 80% sure...)

[LeeoBianchi]

Okay @prashjha, Zenodo archiving should be done. Here is the link https://zenodo.org/records/11192548

Let me know if any further action is needed from my side.

Thank you!

[prashjha]

@editorialbot set 10.5281/zenodo.11192548 as archive

[editorialbot]

Done! archive is now 10.5281/zenodo.11192548

[prashjha]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

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

[prashjha]

@LeeoBianchi, thank you. Moving to the next and final stage for publication.

Thank you, @marcobonici and @baxmittens, for your time and efforts in reviewing this work for JOSS. I appreciate it.

[prashjha]

@editorialbot recommend-accept

[editorialbot]

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1051/0004-6361/202346414 is OK
- 10.1086/427976 is OK
- 10.1086/425219 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/201321494 is OK
- 10.21105/jcon.00068 is OK
- 10.21105/astro.2210.13260 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: Healpix.jl: Julia-only port of the HEALPix library
- No DOI given, and none found for title: DUCC
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Euclid preparation: XXVIII. Modelling of the weak ...

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

:wave: @openjournals/csism-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published.

Check final proof :point_right::page_facing_up: Download article

If the paper PDF and the deposit XML files look good in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/pull/5354, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command @editorialbot accept

[danielskatz]

@LeeoBianchi - As track editor, I've proofread the paper and suggested changes in https://github.com/LeeoBianchi/HealpixMPI.jl/pull/10.

In addition, something is wrong with the grammar of the second sentence of the summary, and I can't suggest a fix because I'm a little unsure what the intent of the sentence is. Another issue is that SHT sometimes is used for SHTs, and sometimes SHTs is used. I suggest using SHT for one, and SHTs for multiple, consistently through the paper.

Please let me know when the PR is merged (or what you disagree with), and when you have addressed the other two points, then we can proceed to publication.

[LeeoBianchi]

@LeeoBianchi - As track editor, I've proofread the paper and suggested changes in LeeoBianchi/HealpixMPI.jl#10.

In addition, something is wrong with the grammar of the second sentence of the summary, and I can't suggest a fix because I'm a little unsure what the intent of the sentence is. Another issue is that SHT sometimes is used for SHTs, and sometimes SHTs is used. I suggest using SHT for one, and SHTs for multiple, consistently through the paper.

Please let me know when the PR is merged (or what you disagree with), and when you have addressed the other two points, then we can proceed to publication.

Hi, thank you for proofreading my paper. I merged your PR as all the changes proposed looked good.

I tried to rephrase the sentence you pointed out, I hope it is more clear now.

You were right about the SHT/SHTs issue, I think grammarly messed up most of them, I should have fixed that too.

I pushed alle the fixes in a new commit, let me know I should fix anything else.

Cheers

[danielskatz]

I've added some comments in your commit

[LeeoBianchi]

I've added some comments in your commit

I should have implemented all the proposed changes. Thank you!

[danielskatz]

I've added one more small comment on https://github.com/LeeoBianchi/HealpixMPI.jl/commit/dc177d0de2422d3abb2dd9557e61f08a31d8b538 - once this is fixed, I think we'll be ready to go.

[LeeoBianchi]

I've added one more small comment on LeeoBianchi/HealpixMPI.jl@dc177d0 - once this is fixed, I think we'll be ready to go.

Done!

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot recommend-accept

[editorialbot]

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.1051/0004-6361/202346414 is OK
- 10.1086/427976 is OK
- 10.1086/425219 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/201321494 is OK
- 10.21105/jcon.00068 is OK
- 10.21105/astro.2210.13260 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: Healpix.jl: Julia-only port of the HEALPix library
- No DOI given, and none found for title: DUCC
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Euclid preparation: XXVIII. Modelling of the weak ...

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

:wave: @openjournals/csism-eics, this paper is ready to be accepted and published.

Check final proof :point_right::page_facing_up: Download article

If the paper PDF and the deposit XML files look good in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/pull/5358, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the command @editorialbot accept

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot accept

[editorialbot]

Doing it live! Attempting automated processing of paper acceptance...

[editorialbot]

Ensure proper citation by uploading a plain text CITATION.cff file to the default branch of your repository.

If using GitHub, a Cite this repository menu will appear in the About section, containing both APA and BibTeX formats. When exported to Zotero using a browser plugin, Zotero will automatically create an entry using the information contained in the .cff file.

You can copy the contents for your CITATION.cff file here:

CITATION.cff

``` cff-version: "1.2.0" authors: - family-names: Bianchi given-names: Leo A. orcid: "https://orcid.org/0009-0002-6351-5426" doi: 10.5281/zenodo.11192548 message: If you use this software, please cite our article in the Journal of Open Source Software. preferred-citation: authors: - family-names: Bianchi given-names: Leo A. orcid: "https://orcid.org/0009-0002-6351-5426" date-published: 2024-05-20 doi: 10.21105/joss.06467 issn: 2475-9066 issue: 97 journal: Journal of Open Source Software publisher: name: Open Journals start: 6467 title: "HealpixMPI.jl: an MPI-parallel implementation of the Healpix tessellation scheme in Julia" type: article url: "https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.06467" volume: 9 title: "HealpixMPI.jl: an MPI-parallel implementation of the Healpix tessellation scheme in Julia" ```

If the repository is not hosted on GitHub, a .cff file can still be uploaded to set your preferred citation. Users will be able to manually copy and paste the citation.

Find more information on .cff files here and here.

[editorialbot]

🐘🐘🐘 👉 Toot for this paper 👈 🐘🐘🐘

[editorialbot]

🚨🚨🚨 THIS IS NOT A DRILL, YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED A PAPER INTO JOSS! 🚨🚨🚨

Here's what you must now do:

0. Check final PDF and Crossref metadata that was deposited :point_right: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-papers/pull/5359
1. Wait five minutes, then verify that the paper DOI resolves https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.06467
2. If everything looks good, then close this review issue.
3. Party like you just published a paper! 🎉🌈🦄💃👻🤘

Any issues? Notify your editorial technical team...

[danielskatz]

Congratulations to @LeeoBianchi (Leo Alessandro Bianchi) on your publication!!

And thanks to @marcobonici and @baxmittens for reviewing, and to @prashjha for editing! JOSS depends on volunteers and we couldn't do it without you

[editorialbot]

:tada::tada::tada: Congratulations on your paper acceptance! :tada::tada::tada:

If you would like to include a link to your paper from your README use the following code snippets:

Markdown:
[![DOI](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.06467/status.svg)](https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.06467)

HTML:
<a style="border-width:0" href="https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.06467">
  <img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.06467/status.svg" alt="DOI badge" >
</a>

reStructuredText:
.. image:: https://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.06467/status.svg
   :target: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.06467

This is how it will look in your documentation:

We need your help!

The Journal of Open Source Software is a community-run journal and relies upon volunteer effort. If you'd like to support us please consider doing either one (or both) of the the following:

• Volunteering to review for us sometime in the future. You can add your name to the reviewer list here: https://reviewers.joss.theoj.org/join
• Making a small donation to support our running costs here: https://numfocus.org/donate-to-joss

[LeeoBianchi]

Many thanks @danielskatz @prashjha @marcobonici @baxmittens for your time to review my paper!