Open editorialbot opened 1 week ago
editorialbot
commented
1 week 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 commandsFor example, to regenerate the paper pdf after making changes in the paper's md or bib files, type:
@editorialbot generate pdfSoftware report:
github.com/AlDanial/cloc v 1.90 T=0.22 s (647.2 files/s, 349434.3 lines/s)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Language files blank comment code
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CSV 77 0 0 64839
HTML 16 590 13 5220
CSS 8 252 75 1512
Python 7 417 847 1103
JavaScript 7 131 197 817
YAML 6 10 8 352
reStructuredText 13 312 136 321
TeX 1 16 0 205
Markdown 3 48 0 93
DOS Batch 1 8 1 26
TOML 1 3 1 22
SVG 2 0 0 18
Jupyter Notebook 1 0 117 17
make 1 4 7 9
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUM: 144 1791 1402 74554
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Commit count by author:
159 mdp0023
7 Matthew Preisser
1 Paola PassalacquaReference check summary (note 'MISSING' DOIs are suggestions that need verification):
✅ OK DOIs
- 10.2202/1547-7355.1732 is OK
- 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.03.008 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2016.09.006 is OK
- 10.1111/1540-6237.8402002 is OK
- 10.2202/1547-7355.1792 is OK
- 10.2307/2137795 is OK
- 10.1111/risa.12677 is OK
- 10.3390/su12156006 is OK
- 10.1080/00045608.2012.700616 is OK
- 10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.06.011 is OK
- 10.5194/hess-26-3941-2022 is OK
- 10.3389/frwa.2023.1278205 is OK
- 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102613 is OK
- 10.1080/24694452.2018.1535887 is OK
- 10.1007/s11069-019-03820-z is OK
- 10.1007/s11069-020-04470-2 is OK
- 10.13140/RG.2.2.35146.80324 is OK
🟡 SKIP DOIs
- None
❌ MISSING DOIs
- None
❌ INVALID DOIs
- None
Paper file info:
📄 Wordcount for paper.md is 1231
✅ The paper includes a Statement of need section
editorialbot
commented
1 week ago License info:
✅ License found: MIT License (Valid open source OSI approved license)
editorialbot
commented
1 week ago :point_right::page_facing_up: Download article proof :page_facing_up: View article proof on GitHub :page_facing_up: :point_left:
sappelhoff
commented
1 week ago Hello again! 👋
@dataspider, @bkrayfield
FYI @mdp0023
This is the review thread for the paper. All of our higher-level communications will happen here from now on, review comments and discussion can happen in the repository of the project (details below).
📓 Please read the "Reviewer instructions & questions" in the comment from our editorialbot (above).
✅ All reviewers get their own checklist with the JOSS requirements - you generate them as per the details in the editorialbot comment. As you go over the submission, please check any items that you feel have been satisfied.
💻 The JOSS review is different from most other journals: The reviewers are encouraged to submit issues and pull requests on the software repository. When doing so, please mention the link to https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/7212 so that a link is created to this thread. That will also help me to keep track!
❓ Please also feel free to comment and ask questions on this thread if you are unsure about something!
🎯 We aim for the review process to be completed within about 4-6 weeks but please make a start well ahead of this as JOSS reviews are by their nature iterative and any early feedback you may be able to provide to the author will be very helpful in meeting this schedule.
Submitting author: !--author-handle-->@mdp0023<!--end-author-handle-- (Matthew Preisser) Repository: https://github.com/mdp0023/SVInsight Branch with paper.md (empty if default branch): main Version: v1.1.0 Editor: !--editor-->@sappelhoff<!--end-editor-- Reviewers: @dataspider, @bkrayfield 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
@dataspider & @bkrayfield, 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 @sappelhoff 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
@dataspider, please create your checklist typing:
@editorialbot generate my checklist@bkrayfield, please create your checklist typing:
@editorialbot generate my checklist