Open editorialbot opened 3 weeks 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
- 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1997.tb51656.x is OK
- 10.1111/j.1365-2966.2009.14625.x is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/201322361 is OK
- 10.3847/0004-637X/818/2/130 is OK
- 10.1051/aas:2000332 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-3881/abd806 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4365/abd4e3 is OK
- 10.3847/1538-4365/ac2ee2 is OK
- 10.1093/mnras/stad556 is OK
- 10.1051/0004-6361/202346094 is OK
MISSING DOIs
- No DOI given, and none found for title: The O-C Diagram: Basic Procedures
INVALID DOIs
- None
Software report:
github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90 T=0.06 s (849.4 files/s, 181902.8 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language files blank comment code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Python 30 1125 1392 3704
Jupyter Notebook 6 0 3141 528
TeX 1 10 0 181
reStructuredText 5 79 85 66
Markdown 2 19 0 48
YAML 2 5 4 46
DOS Batch 1 8 1 26
make 1 4 7 9
TOML 1 0 0 6
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM: 49 1250 4630 4614
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commit count by author:
149 astrobatty
22 Attila Bódi
Paper file info:
📄 Wordcount for paper.md
is 485
✅ 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:
Hi @keatonb & @darthoctopus, and thanks again for agreeing to review (and so quickly!). This is the review thread for the paper. All of our correspondence will now happen here.
Please read the "Reviewer instructions & questions" in the first comment above, and generate your checklists by commenting @editorialbot generate my checklist
on this issue. As you go over the submission, please check off any items that you feel have been satisfied. There are also links to the JOSS reviewer guidelines.
The JOSS review is different from most other journals. We aim to work with the authors to help them meet our criteria instead of merely passing judgement on the submission. We also encourage reviewers to submit issues and pull requests on the software repository. When doing so, please mention openjournals/joss-reviews#7118
so that the issue/PR is linked to this thread. Please also feel free to comment and ask questions on this thread. JOSS editors have found it better to post comments/questions/suggestions as you come across them instead of waiting until you've reviewed the entire package.
We aim for the review process to be completed within about 4-6 weeks but start whenever you can. JOSS reviews are iterative and the authors can start responding while you continue to review other parts of the submission.
If it suits your workflow, you're welcome to assign yourself to this issue in the GitHub UI.
Finally, don't hesitate to ask any questions you might have about the process.
Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@astrobatty<!--end-author-handle-- (Attila Bódi) Repository: https://github.com/konkolyseismolab/seismolab Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): Version: v1.1.2 Editor: !--editor-->@warrickball<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @keatonb, @darthoctopus 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
@keatonb & @darthoctopus, 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 @warrickball 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 @darthoctopus
📝 Checklist for @keatonb