search

openjournals / joss-reviews

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

[PRE REVIEW]: pide: Petrophysical Interpretation tools for geoDynamic Exploration. #6776

Open editorialbot opened 1 month ago

editorialbot commented 1 month ago

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@sinanozaydin<!--end-author-handle-- (Sinan Özaydın) Repository: https://github.com/sinanozaydin/pide Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v0.2 Editor: !--editor-->@kthyng<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: !--reviewers-list-->@kujaku11<!--end-reviewers-list-- Managing EiC: Kristen Thyng

Status

status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/13828c7227715f46aa96f343f1f544a3"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/13828c7227715f46aa96f343f1f544a3/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/13828c7227715f46aa96f343f1f544a3/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/13828c7227715f46aa96f343f1f544a3)

Author instructions

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

@sinanozaydin 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 1 month 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 1 month ago

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.10 s (1121.8 files/s, 194589.6 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python                          48           3279           1255           7285
Jupyter Notebook                11              0           3903           1329
TeX                              4              1              0           1089
JSON                             2              0              0           1046
CSV                             46              0              0            456
Markdown                         2             32              0             77
TOML                             1              1              0             21
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                           114           3313           5158          11303
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

   231  Sinan Özaydın
     3  Lu Li
     1  Patrice Rey
editorialbot commented 1 month ago 
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):

OK DOIs

- None

MISSING DOIs

- 10.1029/2020gc009126 may be a valid DOI for title: MATE: An analysis tool for the interpretation of m...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: A MATLAB toolbox and Excel workbook for calculatin...
- 10.1016/j.cageo.2011.01.002 may be a valid DOI for title: “SIGMELTS”: A web portal for electrical conductivi...
- 10.1016/j.cageo.2014.01.010 may be a valid DOI for title: ModEM: A modular system for inversion of electroma...
- 10.1093/gji/ggw290 may be a valid DOI for title: MARE2DEM: a 2-D inversion code for controlled-sour...
- 10.1093/gji/ggz277 may be a valid DOI for title: Gravitational field calculation in spherical coord...

INVALID DOIs

- None
editorialbot commented 1 month ago

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 814

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

editorialbot commented 1 month ago

License info:

🟡 License found: GNU General Public License v3.0 (Check here for OSI approval)

editorialbot commented 1 month ago

:warning: An error happened when generating the pdf.

kthyng commented 1 month ago

@sinanozaydin looks like the path to the figure in your paper isn't correct, can you fix this?

kthyng commented 1 month ago

Hi @sinanozaydin and thanks for your submission! I am looking for some specific items to make sure your submission fits our requirements at a high level (not at the more detailed review level) before moving on to finding an editor or putting this on our waitlist if no relevant editors are available. I'll comment over time as I have a chance to go through them:

In the meantime, please take a look at the comments above ⬆️ from the editorialbot to address any DOI, license, or paper issues if you're able (there may not be any), or suggest reviewers. For reviewers, 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.

kthyng commented 1 month ago

@sinanozaydin Comments:

sinanozaydin commented 1 month ago

Hello Kristen @kthyng,

I will try to address these in the following week!

Best regards,

@editorialbot commands

sinanozaydin commented 1 month ago

@editorialbot generate pdf

editorialbot commented 1 month ago

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

sinanozaydin commented 1 month ago

@kthyng

Reviewer suggestions:

  1. Lindsay Heagy (Github: lheagy)
  2. Santiago Soler (Github: santisoler)
  3. Jared Peacock (Github: kujaku11)
  4. Rowan Cockett (Github: rowanc1)
kthyng commented 1 month ago

I will try to address these in the following week!

Regarding my docs and tests questions, I just mean them to be questions for now.

sinanozaydin commented 1 month ago

@kthyng

Hello Kristen,

Thanks for your input! For readthedocs I am intending to build one in the near future. At this stage, is it enough to say it will be built later? My hands are really tied with fieldwork currently.

For tests, the users can use the notebooks for testing indeed.

kthyng commented 1 month ago

@sinanozaydin Yes, later is fine. Everything looks in order for now. We don't have any relevant editor availability at the moment so I will add this to our waitlist.

kthyng commented 2 weeks ago

Hi @lucydot! Any chance this could be up your alley for editing given your materials science background?

kthyng commented 2 weeks ago

@editorialbot invite @lucydot as editor

editorialbot commented 2 weeks ago

Invitation to edit this submission sent!

lucydot commented 2 weeks ago

Hi @kthyng ; I'm afraid this is far outside of my experience/training. It's probably best to wait for someone with a more suitable background to become free. However if there is no-one else in JOSS suited to it, then I will take it - it must be that sometimes submissions come up that are outside of everyones wheelhouse.

kthyng commented 1 week ago

@lucydot fair enough!

kthyng commented 6 days ago

@editorialbot assign me as editor

editorialbot commented 6 days ago

Assigned! @kthyng is now the editor

kthyng commented 6 days ago

Hi @sinanozaydin I'll be your editor! Next step is I will search for reviewers

kthyng commented 6 days ago

Hi @rowanc1 and @kujaku11! Are you interested in reviewing this submission for the Journal of Open Source Software? We ask that reviews start within a week or two and ideally wrap up within 4-6 weeks, keeping in mind this is usually an iterative process between the reviewers and author(s). We carry out our checklist-driven reviews here in GitHub issues and follow these guidelines: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/review_criteria.html. Thanks for your consideration.

kujaku11 commented 6 days ago

@kthyng I would be willing to review this submission.

kthyng commented 6 days ago

@kujaku11 Excellent! First I should have you read the conflict of interest policy here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html#joss-conflict-of-interest-policy

If that is ok, then I'll add you as a reviewer. Once we have two reviewers I will start the review.

kujaku11 commented 6 days ago

@kthyng I have no issues with conflict of interest

kthyng commented 6 days ago

@editorialbot add @kujaku11 as reviewer

editorialbot commented 6 days ago

@kujaku11 added to the reviewers list!