[PRE REVIEW]: NeuroClick: software for mimicking the click reaction to generate drug-like molecules permeating the blood‒brain barrier

[editorialbot]

Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@virtualscreenlab<!--end-author-handle-- (Sergey Shityakov) Repository: https://github.com/virtualscreenlab/NeuroClick Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): main Version: v1.0.0 Editor: Pending Reviewers: Pending Managing EiC: Kevin M. Moerman

Status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/077348b54be9d0a440dfa94717b24e2b"><img src="https://joss.theoj.org/papers/077348b54be9d0a440dfa94717b24e2b/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/077348b54be9d0a440dfa94717b24e2b/status.svg)](https://joss.theoj.org/papers/077348b54be9d0a440dfa94717b24e2b)

Author instructions

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

@virtualscreenlab 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]

:warning: An error happened when generating the pdf.

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot set branch as main

[editorialbot]

I'm sorry human, I don't understand that. You can see what commands I support by typing:

@editorialbot commands

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot set main branch

[editorialbot]

I'm sorry human, I don't understand that. You can see what commands I support by typing:

@editorialbot commands

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot set main as branch

[editorialbot]

Done! branch is now main

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot generate pdf

[editorialbot]

:warning: An error happened when generating the pdf. Problem with ORCID (0000-0000-0000-0000) for Anastasiia Isakova. Invalid ORCID.

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@virtualscreenlab can you check this error (e.g. enter valid ORCID entries or check out docs on how to handle authors without an ORCID) :point_up:

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot check repository

[editorialbot]

Software report:

github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90  T=0.10 s (218.4 files/s, 403032.9 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language                     files          blank        comment           code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HTML                             1           5550              0          33209
Python                          18            272             21           1382
TeX                              1              8              0             83
Markdown                         2             18              0             59
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM:                            22           5848             21          34733
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commit count by author:

    10  Virtual Screen Lab

[editorialbot]

Paper file info:

📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 464

✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section

[editorialbot]

License info:

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

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@virtualscreenlab thanks for this submissions. Unfortunately this submission does not meet the JOSS standards and will therefore be rejected.

Below is some feedback relating to rejection, and most relate to our substantial scholarly effort criteria:

• The contribution history looks very sparse, e.g. very few commits and only by a single developer. Hence the project does not look sufficiently mature.
• The project is relatively small in terms of lines of code and narrow in terms of functionality.
• The project README looks incomplete (lacks a basic description, information on installation/getting started, links to documentation, testing, and contribution guidelines).
• Contribution guidelines appear to be lacking (and/or not clarified in README)
• The project appears to lack automated testing (and/or not clarified in README)
• The project appears to lack documentation (and/or not clarified in README)

[Kevin-Mattheus-Moerman]

@editorialbot reject

[editorialbot]

Paper rejected.