search

openjournals / joss-reviews

Reviews for the Journal of Open Source Software
Creative Commons Zero v1.0 Universal
707 stars 37 forks source link

[PRE REVIEW]: AtomNeb: Atomic Data for Ionized Nebulae #799

Closed whedon closed 6 years ago

whedon commented 6 years ago

Submitting author: @danehkar (Ashkbiz Danehkar) Repository: https://github.com/atomneb/AtomNeb-idl Version: v0.0.1 Editor: @arfon Reviewers: @mgalloy, @mdpiper

Author instructions

Thanks for submitting your paper to JOSS @danehkar. The JOSS editor (shown at the top of this issue) will work with you on this issue to find a reviewer for your submission before creating the main review issue.

@danehkar if you have any suggestions for potential reviewers then please mention them here in this thread. In addition, this list of people have already agreed to review for JOSS and may be suitable for this submission.

Editor instructions

The JOSS submission bot @whedon is here to help you find and assign reviewers and start the main review. To find out what @whedon can do for you type:

@whedon commands
whedon commented 6 years ago

Hello human, I'm @whedon. I'm here to help you with some common editorial tasks.

For a list of things I can do to help you, just type:

@whedon commands
whedon commented 6 years ago 
Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...
whedon commented 6 years ago

--> Check article proof :page_facing_up: <--

danehkar commented 6 years ago

Based on your list of joss reviewers, I think that @mgalloy @Scivision @Mankoff would be great reviewers for IDL programs.

arfon commented 6 years ago

@whedon assign @arfon as editor

whedon commented 6 years ago

OK, the editor is @arfon

arfon commented 6 years ago

@mgalloy @scivision @mankoff - would one or more of you be willing to review this submission for JOSS?

mgalloy commented 6 years ago

I can review this.

arfon commented 6 years ago

I can review this.

Great, thanks @mgalloy! I'd like to find two reviewers for this submission if possible so if you could just sit tight for another few days that would be great. Once we have a second reviewer, I'll open up the main review issue.

danehkar commented 6 years ago

Your list of joss reviewers also shows that @manodeep @mattpitkin @zingale @ziotom78 @benjaminrose @Cadair @nespinoza are comfortable with reviewing topic areas of astronomy and astrophysics.

danehkar commented 6 years ago

@arfon I corrected minor typo mistakes. Please regenerate the article PDF after assigning 2 reviewers.

zingale commented 6 years ago

I'm not really an IDL person anymore, and don't have IDL to test it, so I don't think I can review

ziotom78 commented 6 years ago

Same for me, it has been years since I used IDL and no longer have a license.

In data 9 agosto 2018 9:57:12 PM Michael Zingale notifications@github.com ha scritto:

I'm not really an IDL person anymore, and don't have IDL to test it, so I don't think I can review — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

manodeep commented 6 years ago

Same situation for me - have not written/used IDL in 3+ years

nespinoza commented 6 years ago

Same here! Dropped IDL at least 7+ years ago. Sorry!

arfon commented 6 years ago

@danehkar as with your other submission, I think it might be tough to find IDL reviewers these days. Please feel free to suggest potential reviewers from places other than the list I shared earlier.

danehkar commented 6 years ago

It might work on GNU Data Language (GDL). As my library depends on IDL Astronomy User's library, I cannot fix any GDL-incompatibility bugs related to IDL Astronomy User's library. I am also preparing a Python version of these package (AtomNeb + proEQUIB). However, I will release them next year. Most people who work at US research institutes have IDL license on their computers. For example, @wlandsman who works on IDL Astronomy User's library, IDLAstro, might be able to test my IDL libraries (AtomNeb and proEQUIB), or @flamingbear who works on Coyote IDL Library.

wlandsman commented 6 years ago

FYI, the team leading the development of GDL (the free IDL clone) have worked to make it compatible with IDL Astronomy User's library, and have verified this for the case of the FITS I/O routines. I took a quick look at AtomNeb and it seems very likely to work under GDL since it does not use widget or very recent IDL additions.

On Fri, Aug 10, 2018 at 1:12 PM Ashkbiz Danehkar notifications@github.com wrote:

It might work on GNU Data Language (GDL) https://github.com/gnudatalanguage/gdl. As my library depends on IDL Astronomy User's library https://idlastro.gsfc.nasa.gov/homepage.html, I cannot fix any GDL-incompatibility bugs related to IDL Astronomy User's library. I am also preparing a Python version of these package (AtomNeb + proEQUIB). However, I will release them next year. Most people who work at US research institutes have IDL license on their computers. For example, @wlandsman https://github.com/wlandsman who works on IDL Astronomy User's library, IDLAstro https://github.com/wlandsman/IDLAstro, might be able to test my IDL libraries (AtomNeb and proEQUIB), or @flamingbear https://github.com/flamingbear who works on Coyote IDL Library https://github.com/idl-coyote/coyote.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/799#issuecomment-412146764, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AG96dETvbOi6pIjUMwjq2-0P7oph48saks5uPb7zgaJpZM4U99DY .

danehkar commented 6 years ago

@wlandsman Please also look at [PRE REVIEW]: proEQUIB. proEQUIB IDL library uses the AtomNeb APIs. There are some examples.

danehkar commented 6 years ago

@wlandsman if you are able to review and test this IDL library, please let @arfon know as soon as possible since he is looking for 2 reviewers for this submission in JOSS. Currently, he found one reviewer.

mgalloy commented 6 years ago

@mdpiper would be a good IDL reviewer. I believe he has started the process to be a reviewer.

arfon commented 6 years ago

Hi @mgalloy & @wlandsman, firstly, many thanks for your help/interest in these packages thus far.

We've recently had two submissions from @danehkar: this one, and the proEQUIB IDL library.

I'm wondering if you'd be both willing to review both of these packages? I ask as we're really struggling to find suitable reviewers for these packages.

If this is something that you'd be open to then I would go ahead and start the reviews for both but there would be no expectation on our part that you complete these both simultaneously!

What do you both think?

mgalloy commented 6 years ago

I can review both of the packages.

mdpiper commented 6 years ago

Hi Arfon,

I’m happy to help; just let me know!

mp

On Aug 16, 2018, at 4:13 AM, Arfon Smith notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

Hi @mgalloyhttps://github.com/mgalloy & @wlandsmanhttps://github.com/wlandsman, firstly, many thanks for your help/interest in these packages thus far.

We've recently had two submissions from @danehkarhttps://github.com/danehkar: this one, and the proEQUIBhttps://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/798 IDL library.

I'm wondering if you'd be both willing to review both of these packages? I ask as we're really struggling to find suitable reviewers for these packages.

If this is something that you'd be open to then I would go ahead and start the reviews for both but there would be no expectation on our part that you complete these both simultaneously!

What do you both think?

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/799#issuecomment-413494976, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AFaS76XcaLakq2Y8whqWFBhR8raz-aSaks5uRUXCgaJpZM4U99DY.

arfon commented 6 years ago

@whedon add @mgalloy as reviewer

whedon commented 6 years ago

OK, @mgalloy is now a reviewer

arfon commented 6 years ago

@whedon add @mdpiper as reviewer

whedon commented 6 years ago

OK, @mdpiper is now a reviewer

arfon commented 6 years ago

@whedon start review

whedon commented 6 years ago

OK, I've started the review over in https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/issues/898. Feel free to close this issue now!

arfon commented 6 years ago

@mgalloy, @mdpiper - thanks so much for agreeing to review these packages! I've gone ahead and started the review for this submission and will do the same for #798.

@danehkar - given you have the same reviewers for both of these packages - do you have a preference for which package @mgalloy & @mdpiper review first?

danehkar commented 5 years ago

@whedon generate pdf

whedon commented 5 years ago 
Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...
whedon commented 5 years ago

:point_right: Check article proof :page_facing_up: :point_left:

danehkar commented 5 years ago

@whedon generate pdf

whedon commented 5 years ago 
Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...
whedon commented 5 years ago

:point_right: Check article proof :page_facing_up: :point_left:

danehkar commented 5 years ago

@whedon generate pdf

whedon commented 5 years ago 
Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...
whedon commented 5 years ago

:point_right: Check article proof :page_facing_up: :point_left: