Open editorialbot opened 1 month 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
Reference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
OK DOIs
- 10.1145/3287324.3287440 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- No DOI given, and none found for title: NVivo
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The Plain Person’s Guide to Plain Text Social Scie...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Realizing mixed-methods approaches with MAXQDA
- No DOI given, and none found for title: UNIX Time-Sharing System
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The Delphi technique: A credible research methodol...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Qualitative and mixed methods data analysis using ...
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Qualitative Data Analysis
- No DOI given, and none found for title: Atlas. ti for qualitative data analysis
INVALID DOIs
- None
Software report:
github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90 T=0.05 s (1516.2 files/s, 119297.9 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language files blank comment code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python 71 475 378 3791
reStructuredText 2 210 64 717
XSD 1 7 32 462
Markdown 2 21 0 112
TeX 1 1 0 67
TOML 1 6 0 30
DOS Batch 1 8 1 26
YAML 1 4 3 10
make 1 4 7 9
HTML 1 2 0 5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM: 82 738 485 5229
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commit count by author:
200 Chris Proctor
3 Chris
3 Varun Bhatt
2 dependabot[bot]
Paper file info:
📄 Wordcount for paper.md
is 384
✅ The paper includes a Statement of need
section
License info:
🟡 License found: Other
(Check here for OSI approval)
:point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
@SamHames and @cmaimone,
Dear reviewers, you can start your review by creating your tasklist with the following command:
@editorialbot generate my checklist
In that list, there are several tasks. Whenever you perform a task, you can check on the corresponding checkbox. You can also reference the JOSS reviewer guidelines which is linked in first comment in this thread. Since the review process of JOSS is interactive, you can always interact with the author, the other reviewers, and the editor during the process. You can open issues and pull requests in the target repo. Please mention the url of this page in there so that we can keep tracking what is going on.
Thank you in advance.
Thanks for the feedback--I have accepted the proposals and updated the repo.
Thanks for catching the issues with qc corpus import
in the tutorial; I have corrected the docs and tested the changes. No changes were needed to the software itself.
I believe all open issues have now been addressed. When testing, please make sure you have version 1.4.1 or better. Thanks!
@cmaimone is your checklist up to date? If so, can you please clarify what is left to do to address the points not checked?
@SamHames are you able to get a review going soon?
My checklist is up to date. I was waiting on updates that were made yesterday to get a chance to use the software. Should be able to pick it up this week
Thanks to everyone involved in the ongoing review. I believe I have adequately addressed all open issues in the latest release, 1.5.2.
Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@cproctor<!--end-author-handle-- (Chris Proctor) Repository: https://github.com/cproctor/qualitative-coding Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: 1.3.2 Editor: !--editor-->@ymzayek<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @SamHames, @cmaimone Archive: Pending
Status
Status badge code:
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
@SamHames & @cmaimone, 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:
The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.readthedocs.io/en/latest/reviewer_guidelines.html. Any questions/concerns please let @ymzayek 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 @cmaimone