[PRE REVIEW]: FaaSr: R Package for Function-as-a-Service Cloud Computing

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@spark0510<!--end-author-handle-- (Sungjae Park) Repository: https://github.com/FaaSr/FaaSr-package Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v1.3.0 Editor: !--editor-->@danielskatz<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @tyson-swetnam, @yadudoc Managing EiC: Daniel S. Katz

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/6646d02b73aad6e2b23e25301864e16c"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/6646d02b73aad6e2b23e25301864e16c/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/6646d02b73aad6e2b23e25301864e16c/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/6646d02b73aad6e2b23e25301864e16c)

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @spark0510. Currently, there isn't a JOSS editor assigned to your paper.

@spark0510 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]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.03 s (1755.3 files/s, 234521.1 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
R                               33            695           1496           2986
JSON                             2              1              0            274
Markdown                         5             78              0            246
TeX                              1             17              0            136
YAML                             4             15              6            116
Rmd                              9            384            727             38
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            54           1190           2229           3796
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

   317  Sungjae Park
    96  github-actions[bot]
    35  Renato Figueiredo
    11  nan mu
     1  Cayelan Carey
     1  Nan Mu
     1  Yun-Jung
     1  renatof

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- None

MISSING DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: S3
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The Object Store for AI Data Infrastructure
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Lambda
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Github Actions
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Open Source Serverless Cloud Platform
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Numpywren: Serverless linear algebra
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Occupy the cloud: Distributed computing for the 99...
- 10.1145/3369583.3392683 may be a valid DOI for title: Funcx: A federated function serving fabric for sci...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Curl: a gentle slope language for the Web.
- 10.32614/cran.package.httr may be a valid DOI for title: httr: Tools for Working with URLs and HTTP
- 10.32614/cran.package.paws may be a valid DOI for title: paws: Amazon Web Services Software Development Kit
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Using cron and crontab
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Foundations of JSON schema
- No DOI given, and none found for title: arrow: Integration to ’Apache’ ’Arrow’
- 10.1002/ecs2.2567 may be a valid DOI for title: Evaluating the popularity of R in ecology
- 10.32614/rj-2020-007 may be a valid DOI for title: The Rockerverse: Packages and Applications for Con...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: FaaSr-Docker Repository
- No DOI given, and none found for title: FaaSr JSON-Builder

INVALID DOIs

- None

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 1561

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

:warning: An error happened when generating the pdf. Problem with ORCID (0000-0000-0000-0000) for Yun-Jung Ku. Invalid ORCID.

[editorialbot]

License info:

🟡 License found: Other (Check here for OSI approval)

[danielskatz]

👋 @spark0510 - note that your paper does not compile. Please follow the example paper and note that you can click on the error above to find out more about it. In addition, you could work on the possibly missing DOIs that editorialbot suggests, but note that some may be incorrect. Please feel free to make changes to your .bib file, then use the command @editorialbot check references to check again, and the command @editorialbot generate pdf after making changes to the .md file or when the references are right to make a new PDF. editorialbot commands need to be the first entry in a new comment.

[danielskatz]

In this case, specifically, please remove the ORCID line rather than using an invalid ORCID in the metadata

[renatof]

Thank you @danielskatz - @spark0510 had been able create a GitHub Action to successfully generate a PDF of the paper, but it looks like we overlooked the ORCID and DOI issues. We'll get those addressed asap.

[spark0510]

@editorialbot check references

[editorialbot]

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

OK DOIs

- 10.48550/arXiv.1810.09679 is OK
- 10.1145/3127479.3128601 is OK
- 10.1145/3369583.3392683 is OK
- 10.32614/CRAN.package.httr is OK
- 10.32614/CRAN.package.paws is OK
- 10.1145/2872427.2883029 is OK
- 10.32614/CRAN.package.arrow is OK
- 10.1002/ecs2.2567 is OK
- 10.48550/arXiv.2001.10641 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- No DOI given, and none found for title: S3
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The Object Store for AI Data Infrastructure
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Lambda
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Github Actions
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Open Source Serverless Cloud Platform
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Curl: a gentle slope language for the Web.
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Using cron and crontab
- No DOI given, and none found for title: FaaSr-Docker Repository
- No DOI given, and none found for title: FaaSr JSON-Builder

INVALID DOIs

- None

[spark0510]

@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:

[editorialbot]

Five most similar historical JOSS papers:

funsies: A minimalist, distributed and dynamic workflow engine Submitting author: @clavigne Handling editor: @diehlpk (Active) Reviewers: @gflofst, @vijaysm Similarity score: 0.7007

The fqar package: R tools for analyzing floristic quality assessment data Submitting author: @equitable-equations Handling editor: @mikemahoney218 (Active) Reviewers: @ifoxfoot, @mhesselbarth Similarity score: 0.6986

slurmR: A lightweight wrapper for HPC with Slurm Submitting author: @gvegayon Handling editor: @karthik (Retired) Reviewers: @mschubert, @mllg Similarity score: 0.6691

Rdataretriever: R Interface to the Data Retriever Submitting author: @henrykironde Handling editor: @fboehm (Active) Reviewers: @rmhogervorst, @jsgalan Similarity score: 0.6632

containerit: Generating Dockerfiles for reproducible research with R Submitting author: @nuest Handling editor: @terrytangyuan (Retired) Reviewers: @vsoch, @cole-brokamp Similarity score: 0.6594

⚠️ 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.

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot assign me as editor

[editorialbot]

Assigned! @danielskatz is now the editor

[danielskatz]

👋 @spark0510 and @renatof - please suggest a few potential reviewers. You can search the list of people that have already agreed to review and may be suitable for this submission, or suggest people outside the list. If you know a potential reviewer's GitHub username, please mention it here in this thread (without tagging them with an @).

[renatof]

Hi @danielskatz - my primary suggestion would be Tyson Swetnam (GitHub user tyson-swetnam) who is familiar with both the cloud/FaaS side and application side; I don't see him in the JOSS reviewer database and he may or may not have the cycles to review (but he could perhaps suggest someone in his team?) Other suggestions based on the papers with similarity scores by the editorial bot and who are in the JOSS reviewer db would be: gvegayon nuest equitable-equations Thanks!

[danielskatz]

👋 @tyson-swetnam - 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

[danielskatz]

👋 @gvegayon and @nuest - would one or both of 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

[tyson-swetnam]

Yes. When is the review due date?

[danielskatz]

Once we start the review (after we get at least 2 reviewers), we shoot for 2-4 weeks

[danielskatz]

👋 @equitable-equations - 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

[danielskatz]

@tyson-swetnam - I'm going to add you as a reviewer, based on your "Yes." Again, the review won't start until I find at least one more reviewer.

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot add @tyson-swetnam as reviewer

[editorialbot]

@tyson-swetnam added to the reviewers list!

[nuest]

@danielskatz Sorry, I'm out. I'm just returning from an extended leave and I wouldn't be able to hold any deadlines. More reliable after the summer again!

[equitable-equations]

@danielskatz I'd love to but this one looks a bit too far outside my expertise. I'm sorry!

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot add @yadudoc as reviewer

Thanks for "volunteering", @yadudoc (And I note that you won't be able to start until the week of 5 Aug)

[editorialbot]

@yadudoc added to the reviewers list!

[danielskatz]

@editorialbot start review

[editorialbot]

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/7027.

[gvegayon]

I see you already have two reviewers. LMK if you'd need a third.

[danielskatz]

@gvegayon - I would be happy to have a third reviewer - I will add you over in the review issue: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/7027.