Closed editorialbot closed 4 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
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1088/1367-2630/acce5a is OK
- 10.1103/PhysRevA.108.063512 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Full Optical Control of Quantum Fluids of Light in...
INVALID DOIs
- None
Software report:
github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90 T=0.03 s (546.3 files/s, 127936.7 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language files blank comment code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python 13 209 620 2792
Markdown 2 89 0 213
TeX 1 3 0 32
YAML 1 1 4 18
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM: 17 302 624 3055
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commit count by author:
78 Tangui Aladjidi
27 taladjidi
4 clpiekarski
3 ruggiamp@gmail.com
1 TANGUI ALADJIDI
Paper file info:
📄 Wordcount for paper.md
is 495
✅ The paper includes a Statement of need
section
License info:
✅ License found: MIT License
(Valid open source OSI approved license)
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
@editorialbot invite @RMeli as editor
Invitation to edit this submission sent!
@editorialbot assign me as editor
Assigned! @RMeli is now the editor
Hi @alexbuccheri 👋
I know you recently reviewed for JOSS (thanks for that, really appreciated!). But would you be interested in reviewing this submission as well? (Totally fine if you have to decline.)
Thank you in advance!
Hi @rashatwi 👋
Would you be interested in reviewing this submission for JOSS (Journal of Open Source Software)?
You can find more information about the submission at the top of this Github issue #6509.
The Journal of Open Source Software (JOSS) is a developer friendly journal for research software packages, with a formal peer-review process that is designed to improve the quality of the software submitted.
Thank you in advance!
Hi @PhilipVinc 👋
Would you be interested in reviewing this submission for JOSS (Journal of Open Source Software)?
You can find more information about the submission at the top of this Github issue #6509.
The Journal of Open Source Software (JOSS) is a developer friendly journal for research software packages, with a formal peer-review process that is designed to improve the quality of the software submitted.
Thank you in advance!
Sorry, reviewing too many things right now...
@RMeli This paper is interesting for me to review. Let me know if I can volunteer for the same. 😊
@PhilipVinc no worries, thank you for letting me know!
@editorialbot add @Abinashbunty as reviewer
Yes, thanks for volunteering!
@Abinashbunty added to the reviewers list!
Hi @RMeli , apologies but I don't have time for this one (and also don't know anything about the nonlinear Schrödinger equation 😅)
No worries, thanks @AlexBuccheri!
@taladjidi thank you for submitting to JOSS. While I look for reviewers, I started having a look at the code base and I noticed the following:
nlse.py
file is a single massive Python file of 2500+ lines of code. Calculations and analysis seems to be very tightly coupled within classes, and it seems that there is a lot of code duplication. There is also a lot of branching in the code (a lot of nested if/else), that makes the logic difficult to follow.Could you please address the previous two points (proper testing, decoupling between calculations and analysis, removal of pervasive code duplication)?
Hi, thank you for getting back to me so quickly. Trying to slowly work my way from "physicist" code to actual code 😅 I'll get right on it. I'll add a new comment once this is done.
Trying to slowly work my way from "physicist" code to actual code
@taladjidi no worries, I totally get where you are coming from. If you need any suggestions do let me know.
@RMeli I significantly refactored the code:
@editorialbot check repository
Software report:
github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90 T=0.03 s (892.2 files/s, 115054.6 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language files blank comment code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python 22 222 469 2450
Markdown 2 80 0 182
YAML 2 3 4 37
TeX 1 3 0 32
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM: 27 308 473 2701
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commit count by author:
131 Tangui Aladjidi
27 taladjidi
4 clpiekarski
3 ruggiamp@gmail.com
1 TANGUI ALADJIDI
Paper file info:
📄 Wordcount for paper.md
is 495
✅ The paper includes a Statement of need
section
License info:
✅ License found: MIT License
(Valid open source OSI approved license)
Thanks @taladjidi. I'll start looking for additional reviewers.
At the moment though, one test fails inexplicably in the GitHub action
Loos like norm
ends up being 0.0
. Do you have any update on troubleshooting the issue?
Hi, yes I saw. I did not manage to replicate the issue. I thought it might be a cache issue since I do a lot of jitting, but even when I clear all caches, I do not manage to replicate this zero norm problem (I created an environment cloning the packages versions used by GitHub). I'll spend some more energy on this today !
@RMeli all good now ! It was an overflow error due to some edge case in the solver's resolution. Now everything passes 🥳
Thanks for the update @taladjidi. Some of the tests you added don't seem very meaningful (test_build_propagator
just uses the same expression as the implementation), but I'll leave it to the reviewers to comment further. Thanks for adding proper testing.
Hi @HugoStrand 👋
Would you be interested in reviewing this submission for JOSS (Journal of Open Source Software)?
You can find more information about the submission at the top of this Github issue #6509.
The Journal of Open Source Software (JOSS) is a developer friendly journal for research software packages, with a formal peer-review process that is designed to improve the quality of the software submitted.
Thank you in advance!
Hi @obliviateandsurrender 👋
Would you be interested in reviewing this submission for JOSS (Journal of Open Source Software)?
You can find more information about the submission at the top of this Github issue #6509.
The Journal of Open Source Software (JOSS) is a developer friendly journal for research software packages, with a formal peer-review process that is designed to improve the quality of the software submitted.
Thank you in advance!
Hey @RMeli, sure thing!
@editorialbot assign @obliviateandsurrender as reviewer
Thank you!
I'm sorry human, I don't understand that. You can see what commands I support by typing:
@editorialbot commands
@editorialbot add @obliviateandsurrender as reviewer
@obliviateandsurrender added to the reviewers list!
Thank you @Abinashbunty and @obliviateandsurrender for agreeing to review for JOSS. I'll soon start the review process, closing this PRE-REVIEW issue and opening a REVIEW issue for the actual review.
If it's your first time reviewing for JOSS, please have a look at the following pages:
A good way to review is to open issues in the software repository, and link them to the (soon-to-be-open) review issue.
Do not hesitate to ping me with any questions you might have.
@editorialbot start review
OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/6607.
Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@taladjidi<!--end-author-handle-- (Tangui Aladjidi) Repository: https://github.com/Quantum-Optics-LKB/NLSE Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: 2.0.0 Editor: !--editor-->@RMeli<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @Abinashbunty, @obliviateandsurrender Managing EiC: Kyle Niemeyer
Status
Status badge code:
Author instructions
Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @taladjidi. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.
@taladjidi 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: