Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[REVIEW]: Reasons: A digital argument mapping library for modern browsers #1044

Closed
whedon opened this issue Oct 22, 2018 · 79 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
6 participants
@whedon
Copy link
Collaborator

commented Oct 22, 2018

Submitting author: @davekinkead (David Kinkead)
Repository: https://github.com/davekinkead/reasons
Version: v1.0.1
Editor: @yochannah
Reviewer: @yochannah, @andytwoods
Archive: 10.5281/zenodo.2766003

Status

status

Status badge code:

HTML: <a href="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/cdf89c5289d83c0e8f8af99929382324"><img src="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/cdf89c5289d83c0e8f8af99929382324/status.svg"></a>
Markdown: [![status](http://joss.theoj.org/papers/cdf89c5289d83c0e8f8af99929382324/status.svg)](http://joss.theoj.org/papers/cdf89c5289d83c0e8f8af99929382324)

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) 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

@yochannah & @andytwoods, please carry out your review in this issue by updating the checklist below. If you cannot edit the checklist please:

  1. Make sure you're logged in to your GitHub account
  2. Be sure to accept the invite at this URL: https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews/invitations

The reviewer guidelines are available here: https://joss.theoj.org/about#reviewer_guidelines. Any questions/concerns please let @yochannah know.

Please try and complete your review in the next two weeks

Review checklist for @yochannah

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

  • Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the repository url?
  • License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
  • Version: v1.0.1
  • Authorship: Has the submitting author (@davekinkead) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?

Functionality

  • Installation: Does installation proceed as outlined in the documentation?
  • Functionality: Have the functional claims of the software been confirmed?
  • Performance: If there are any performance claims of the software, have they been confirmed? (If there are no claims, please check off this item.)

Documentation

  • A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
  • Installation instructions: Is there a clearly-stated list of dependencies? Ideally these should be handled with an automated package management solution.
  • Example usage: Do the authors include examples of how to use the software (ideally to solve real-world analysis problems).
  • Functionality documentation: Is the core functionality of the software documented to a satisfactory level (e.g., API method documentation)?
  • Automated tests: Are there automated tests or manual steps described so that the function of the software can be verified?
  • Community guidelines: Are there clear guidelines for third parties wishing to 1) Contribute to the software 2) Report issues or problems with the software 3) Seek support

Software paper

  • Authors: Does the paper.md file include a list of authors with their affiliations?
  • A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
  • References: Do all archival references that should have a DOI list one (e.g., papers, datasets, software)?

Review checklist for @andytwoods

Conflict of interest

Code of Conduct

General checks

  • Repository: Is the source code for this software available at the repository url?
  • License: Does the repository contain a plain-text LICENSE file with the contents of an OSI approved software license?
  • Version: v1.0.1
  • Authorship: Has the submitting author (@davekinkead) made major contributions to the software? Does the full list of paper authors seem appropriate and complete?

Functionality

  • Installation: Does installation proceed as outlined in the documentation?
  • Functionality: Have the functional claims of the software been confirmed?
  • Performance: If there are any performance claims of the software, have they been confirmed? (If there are no claims, please check off this item.)

Documentation

  • A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
  • Installation instructions: Is there a clearly-stated list of dependencies? Ideally these should be handled with an automated package management solution.
  • Example usage: Do the authors include examples of how to use the software (ideally to solve real-world analysis problems).
  • Functionality documentation: Is the core functionality of the software documented to a satisfactory level (e.g., API method documentation)?
  • Automated tests: Are there automated tests or manual steps described so that the function of the software can be verified?
  • Community guidelines: Are there clear guidelines for third parties wishing to 1) Contribute to the software 2) Report issues or problems with the software 3) Seek support

Software paper

  • Authors: Does the paper.md file include a list of authors with their affiliations?
  • A statement of need: Do the authors clearly state what problems the software is designed to solve and who the target audience is?
  • References: Do all archival references that should have a DOI list one (e.g., papers, datasets, software)?
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Oct 22, 2018

Hello human, I'm @whedon, a robot that can help you with some common editorial tasks. @mbod, it looks like you're currently assigned as the reviewer for this paper 🎉.

⭐️ Important ⭐️

If you haven't already, you should seriously consider unsubscribing from GitHub notifications for this (https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews) repository. As a reviewer, you're probably currently watching this repository which means for GitHub's default behaviour you will receive notifications (emails) for all reviews 😿

To fix this do the following two things:

  1. Set yourself as 'Not watching' https://github.com/openjournals/joss-reviews:

watching

  1. You may also like to change your default settings for this watching repositories in your GitHub profile here: https://github.com/settings/notifications

notifications

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

@whedon commands
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Oct 22, 2018

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented Oct 22, 2018

@yochannah

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Nov 4, 2018

👋 @mbod have you had a chance to look at this yet?

@yochannah

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Dec 14, 2018

Quick status check - is there anything I can do to help progress this? 👍

@davekinkead

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Dec 14, 2018

@yochannah

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Dec 14, 2018

fantastic - feel free to ask any questions on this issue if needed!

@yochannah

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jan 13, 2019

Quick status check - let me know when we're ready to move forward or if you have any issues :)

@labarba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Feb 13, 2019

👋 @mbod, @andytwoods — hi there, I'm one of the Associate Editors-in-chief, and am doing an audit of stalled submissions. We haven't heard from y'all in a while. Can you check in with us to get an idea of timelines for the review to progress? Thanks!

@labarba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Feb 13, 2019

I have just followed up by email with @mbod, who has not shown signs of life here (cc. @yochannah).

@yochannah

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Feb 13, 2019

thanks @labarba! I think @davekinkead is also working on the issues raised by @andytwoods and will let us know when he is ready to revisit.

@davekinkead

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Feb 14, 2019

@davekinkead

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 14, 2019

All fixed now & good to go. Sorry for the delay.

@labarba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Mar 14, 2019

👋 @andytwoods — looks like we're ready for you to take a second look. Thanks!

@labarba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Mar 14, 2019

Hi @mbod — we're hoping to hear from you here: can we still expect a review from you?

@yochannah

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 23, 2019

@mbod, @andytwoods, do you think you might be able to revisit this? Thanks!!!

@andytwoods

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 27, 2019

congrats! All in order.

@labarba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Apr 15, 2019

@yochannah : we have one complete review now, and a second reviewer who has gone MIA. Could you make an assessment at this point about whether we can move forward with acceptance on the basis of the one review we have?

@davekinkead

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 6, 2019

Hi @labarba any news?

@yochannah

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 12, 2019

Okay, I've run through the review steps myself. @davekinkead I'll be happy to accept this, one this issue is fixed with the demo code in the repo:

davekinkead/reasons#5

I'll also give the paper a quick once-over again now.

@yochannah

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 12, 2019

@whedon generate pdf

@davekinkead

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 12, 2019

@whedon generate pdf

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented May 12, 2019

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented May 12, 2019

@labarba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 12, 2019

Regarding Wigmore (1913): you are citing the book, not the review of the book, so that DOI is not correct. However, I did find that the book is now in the public domain and you can find an online archive at https://archive.org/details/principlesofjudi00wigm/ — maybe you could add that URL.

@davekinkead

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 12, 2019

Perfect @labarba!

@whedon generate pdf

@davekinkead

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 12, 2019

@whedon generate pdf

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented May 12, 2019

Attempting PDF compilation. Reticulating splines etc...
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented May 12, 2019

@davekinkead

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented May 12, 2019

@labarba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 12, 2019

@whedon accept

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented May 12, 2019

No archive DOI set. Exiting...

@labarba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 12, 2019

Oops. Please now make a tagged release, and report the version number here, then make a deposit of your full repository on an archive service like Zenodo, and report the DOI here.

@labarba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 12, 2019

@yochannah — Did you tick off the checklist items for @mbod's list? If you, you should edit the comment and put your username there.

@davekinkead

This comment has been minimized.

@labarba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 12, 2019

@whedon set v1.0.1 as version

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented May 12, 2019

OK. v1.0.1 is the version.

@labarba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 12, 2019

@whedon set 10.5281/zenodo.2766003 as archive

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented May 12, 2019

OK. 10.5281/zenodo.2766003 is the archive.

@labarba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 12, 2019

@whedon accept

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented May 12, 2019

Attempting dry run of processing paper acceptance...
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented May 12, 2019


OK DOIs

- 10.7208/chicago/9780226028576.001.0001 is OK
- 10.14742/ajet.1154 is OK
- 10.1007/s10734-009-9226-9 is OK
- 10.1007/s11409-012-9092-1 is OK
- 10.1111/j.1467-9973.1992.tb00551.x is OK
- 10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00673.x is OK
- 10.1017/cbo9780511840005.005 is OK
- 10.5840/teachphil200427213 is OK
- 10.3200/ctch.53.1.41-48 is OK

MISSING DOIs

- https://doi.org/10.2307/1275020 may be missing for title: The principles of judicial proof: as given by logic, psychology, and general experience, and illustrated in judicial trials

INVALID DOIs

- None
@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented May 12, 2019

Check final proof 👉 openjournals/joss-papers#682

If the paper PDF and Crossref deposit XML look good in openjournals/joss-papers#682, then you can now move forward with accepting the submission by compiling again with the flag deposit=true e.g.

@whedon accept deposit=true
@labarba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 12, 2019

@whedon accept deposit=true

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented May 12, 2019

Doing it live! Attempting automated processing of paper acceptance...

@whedon whedon added the accepted label May 12, 2019

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented May 12, 2019

🚨🚨🚨 THIS IS NOT A DRILL, YOU HAVE JUST ACCEPTED A PAPER INTO JOSS! 🚨🚨🚨

Here's what you must now do:

  1. Check final PDF and Crossref metadata that was deposited 👉 openjournals/joss-papers#683
  2. Wait a couple of minutes to verify that the paper DOI resolves https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01044
  3. If everything looks good, then close this review issue.
  4. Party like you just published a paper! 🎉🌈🦄💃👻🤘

Any issues? notify your editorial technical team...

@labarba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 12, 2019

I have now made this edit to the top post: #1044 (comment)

@labarba

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented May 12, 2019

Congratulations, @davekinkead, your JOSS paper is now published!

Many thanks to @yochannah, @andytwoods for their work on this submission 🙏

@labarba labarba closed this May 12, 2019

@whedon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

commented May 12, 2019

🎉🎉🎉 Congratulations on your paper acceptance! 🎉🎉🎉

If you would like to include a link to your paper from your README use the following code snippets:

Markdown:
[![DOI](http://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.01044/status.svg)](https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01044)

HTML:
<a style="border-width:0" href="https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01044">
  <img src="http://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.01044/status.svg" alt="DOI badge" >
</a>

reStructuredText:
.. image:: http://joss.theoj.org/papers/10.21105/joss.01044/status.svg
   :target: https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01044

This is how it will look in your documentation:

DOI

We need your help!

Journal of Open Source Software is a community-run journal and relies upon volunteer effort. If you'd like to support us please consider doing either one (or both) of the the following:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.